9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (10) TMI 1082X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itself was bad in law and void ab initio. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned C.I.T. has legally erred in sustaining the assessments made u/s 153C of the Act when the initiation of proceedings itself was bad in law and void ab initio as notice u/s 153C cannot be issued six years and up-to 10 years when the income escaped is less than Rs. 50 Lakhs in any of the one year or in aggregate in the four years i.e. in appellant's case from AY 2008-09 to AY 2011-12 and in the case of the appellant the alleged income escaping assessment as per the seized material as well as that of the observation of the Assessing officer is only Rs. 48,00,000/- which is less than Rs. 50,00,000/-. 3.. That the learned CIT(A) erred in dismissing the ground raised by the appellant regarding validity of initiation of proceedings u/s 153C. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the initiation of proceedings u/s 153C in the case of the appellant being illegal and bad in law, the assessment proceedings is liable to be quashed. 4. In the law and in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate the fact that the proceedings-initi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s regard is wrong and unjustified. 10. In the law and facts of the case, the Ld. CIT has passed the order U/s 250 and confirmed the additions made by the AO by relying on the remand report. The remand report is bad in law and unjustified as the same is made without granting personal hearing to the appellant as the AO was not present in the office on 16.05.2023 and therefore the appellant could only provide the submission and no explanations or clarifications could be furnished before the AO 11. Without prejudice to the above, the LD. CIT has erred in relying on the remand report as the said order is passed without getting an opportunity of filing the rejoinder to the remand report of the AO dated 25.05.2023 as the appellant didn't receive the mail/mail went to spam folder and the appellant didn't come to know that remand report was issued by the AO. Your Honour is requested to kindly consider giving an opportunity of being heard to the appellant. 12. In law and in the facts and circumstances of case of the appellant, the Ld. CIT has not adjudicated the ground taken for wrong initiation of penalty proceedings under section 271(c) of the Act." 3. Brief facts of the cas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0/-, no documentary evidence was submitted & hence the same was disallowed and added to the total income of the assessee. Thus, an addition of Rs. 48,00,000/- on account of cash payment and Rs. 8,20,334/- as above was made to the income of the assessee for AY 2011-12 u/s 69 of Act as unexplained investment. 2.4 Therefore, assessment has been completed at the total income of Rs. 58,20,133/- vide order dated 30.12.2021. 4. The Assessment Order also been framed on 30/12/2021 for AY 2012-13 under section 153C r.w.s 153A/143(3) of the I.T Act, 1961by making an addition of Rs. 2,00,000/- on account of cash payment and Rs. 1,00,000/- on account of cash received from Kanchan. 5. Aggrieved by the Assessment orders for AY 2011-12 and 2012- 13, the Assessee preferred the Appeals before the CIT(A) and the Ld. CIT(A) vide orders dated 04/08/2023 confirmed the additions made by the Assessee, which are under challenged in the above Appeals. 6. The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee addressing on the Ground No. 1 & 2 submitted that, the initiation of the assessment u/s 153C of the Act itself is illegal and void ab-initio as notice u/s 153C of the Act cannot be issued beyond six years and up to 10 y ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... garding application of the first proviso to Section 153C (1) of the Act has been considered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Jasjit Singh (155 Taxman.com158),wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the application of first proviso to section 153C(1) of the Act would not be confined to question of abatement, but also with regard to date from which six year period was to be reckoned in respect of which returns were to be filed by third party and thus, period for which other persons i.e. Assessee is required to file returns, would commence only from date when materials were forwarded to their jurisdictional A.O. in following manners:- "9. It is evident on a plain interpretation of Section 153C(1) that the Parliamentary intent to enact the proviso was to cater not merely to the question of abatement but also with regard to the date from which the six year period was to be reckoned, in respect of which the returns were to be filed by the third party (whose premises are not searched and in respect of whom the specific provision under Section 153-C was enacted. The revenue 4 argued that the proviso [to Section 153(c)(1)] is confined in its application to the quest ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
