TMI Blog2023 (9) TMI 599X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e allow the ground raised. - Shri Shamim Yahya, Accountant Member And Ms. Astha Chandra, Judicial Member For the Assessee : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate, Shri Somil Aggarwal, Advocate For the Revenue : Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT DR ORDER PER SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : These are appeals by the Revenue and cross objections by the assessee arising out of common order of ld. CIT (A)-4, Kanpur dated 22.11.2021 pertaining to the assessment years 2012-13 2013-14. 2. Grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue in Assessment Years 2012-13 2013-14 read as under :- Assessment Year 2012-13 1. That the DCIT, Central Circle, Noida has illegally assumed jurisdiction to initiate proceedings u/s 153C. 2. That the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of its directors. 7. That on the facts and under the law, the DCIT, Central Circle, Noida had erred in charging interest u/s 234B at Rs. 31,92,588/-. Assessment Year 2013-14 1. That the DCIT, Central Circle, Noida has illegally assumed jurisdiction to initiate proceedings u/s 153C. 2. That the assessment proceedings are liable to be quashed because the notice u/s 153C was not served upon the assessee. 3. That the assessment proceedings are liable to be quashed because the satisfaction note was not supplied to the assessee. 4. That the assessment proceedings are liable to be quashed because the DCIT, Central Circle, Noida had not established that the assessing officer of the searched party had recorded his satisfaction to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent order u/s l44/153C and that too without assuming jurisdiction as per law and without complying with the other mandatory conditions as laid down u/s l53C in accordance with law. 2. That in any case and in any view of the matter, action of Ld. CIT(A) in confirming the action of Ld. AO in passing the impugned assessment order u/s 144/153C is illegal, bad in law and against the facts and circumstances of the case and the same is not sustainable on various legal and factual grounds. 3. That in any case and in any view of the matter, satisfaction recorded u/s 153C is not in accordance with law and hence jurisdiction assumed is bad in law. 4. That in any case and in any view of the matter, addition made in the impugned order is beyond ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ong with questionnaire were also issued but no compliance was made. Therefore, AO completed the assessment proceedings ex-parte by making addition of Rs. 6,15,00,000/- 5. On appeal, ld. CIT (A) deleted the additions on merits. 6. Against the above order, Revenue has filed appeals. Assessee has raised jurisdictional issue in the cross objections. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. We refer to the jurisdictional issue first. 7. The submissions of the ld. Counsel for the assessee in this regard read as under :- The only effective issue in present cross objection is against the assumption of jurisdiction u/s 153C. Similar issue is involved in petition under Rule-27 filed by the respondent assessee. In thi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . It may also please be seen from Annexure A-19 at page 100 that it contains shareholding of the assessee company and therefore, such document per se cannot be said to be incriminating to the assessee. Therefore in absence of such mandatory condition being fulfilled assumption of jurisdiction u/s 153C was not satisfied as held in the following judicial decisions: Search and seizure -- Assessment under s. 153 C--Scope--- Where nothing incriminating is found in the course of search relating to any assessment years, the assessments for such years cannot be disturbed---Items of regular assessment cannot be added back in the proceedings under s. 153C when no incriminating documents were found in respect of the disallowed amounts in the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Search and seizure-Assessment in case of search or requisition- Assessment of third person-Condition precedent=Satisfaction that incriminating material belonged to third person must be recorded- No incriminating material found-Provisions of section 153C cannot be invoked-Order of Appellate Tribunal deleting disallowances of earlier disclosed expenditure proper +Income-tax Act, 1961, ss. 132,1 32A 133A, 153A 1 53C-CIT v. Veerprabhu Marketing Ltd. 388 ITR 574 (CAL) Assessment under s. 153C-Validity vis-a-vis absence of incriminating- No evidence was found during the course of search that any money (cash credit) belongs to the assessee-company or to prove that assessee had received any accommodation entry or that cash was given by assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
