9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (10) TMI 1145X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion 143(3) of the Act is illegal, void and non-est as the same has been passed under section 143(3) of the Act as against the specific provisions under section 153C of the Act. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred, both on facts and in law, in confirming the action of the AO despite the fact that the assessment order passed under section 143(3) of the Act is null and void as the same has been passed in violation of CBDT Circular No. 19/2019 requiring mandatory DIN in the body of the assessment order. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in rejecting the contention of the assessee that the order passed by the learned AO under Section 143(3) of the Act is bad and liable to be quashed as the same has been framed consequent to a search which itself was unlawful and invalid in the eye of law. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the proceedings initiated under Section 143(3) of the Act and the assessment framed under the said section is bad and liable to be quashed in the absence of any valid satisfaction being recorded by the assessing officer of the searched person a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t has raised 11 grounds of appeal. 3. However, while filing the appeal the appellant inadvertently has left out the ground of appeal relating to the assessment proceedings initiated without complying with the provision of section 153C of the Act being bad in law and without jurisdiction and therefore same is liable to be quashed. 4. That accordingly, the applicant is filing application for admission of additional grounds of appeal. 4. The brief facts of the case are that assessee has filed return of income u/s 139of Act declaring income of Rs 2281440/-. A notice u/s 142(1) of the Act along with questionnaire was issued and served upon the assessee through ITBA portal. A search and seizure action carried out on 06-01-2021 u/s. 132 of the Act in Hans Group of cases and various papers/ documents and incriminating material were found and seized from the residence/ business premises of Hans Group of cases. The satisfaction note was recorded by the AO of the assessee on 10-05-2022. According to AO during the course of search on the perusal of the data of the seized mobile phone one image has been found which was related to investment made by Shri Vaibhav Jain in Bhutani Group. Accor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t, dated 30.06.2022 and the consequent assessment order dated 29.12.2022 passed u/s 143(3) of the Act are hereby quashed. The additional grounds filed by the assessee are allowed." 7. The Ld AR further submitted that the notice u/s 143(2) of the Act for A.Y. 2021-22 was issued on 21-12-2022. He has further submitted that it is settled position in law that in respect of assessment proceedings u/s 153C of the Act, blocked period of six assessment years has to be reckoned from the date of receipt of the documents by the AO. In this regard, reliance has placed on the following judgments; 1. M/s. Spendor Landbase Limited Vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax 2014 (11) TMI 1012 2. Jagjit Singh Vs. ACIT, Central Circle-11, New Delhi 2015 (8) TMI 982 3. Commissioner of Income Tax -14 Vs. Shree Jasjit Singh 2023 (1) TMI 572 4. Commissioner of Income Tax 14 Vs. Jasjit Singh 2024 (4) TMI 268 5. The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax Central-1 Vs. Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd. & Others. 2019 (10) TMI 350 6. Shr. Jagjit Singh C/o. M/s. Satish Aggarwal & Associates Vs. ACIT, Central Circle -21, New Delhi 2019 (10) TMI 350 7. Shalimar Town Panners Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT Central Circle - 23 New ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch and six years period would be reckoned from this date. In the case of Jasjit Singh held as under :- "15. We find that an identical issue has been decided by Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of DSL Properties P. Ltd. (supra) in favour of the assessee accepting the similar contention of the assessee. Similar view has been expressed by the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of V.K. Fiscal (supra) holding that the date of receiving of the seized documents would become the date of search and six years period would be reckoned from this date. For a ready reference para no. 19, 21, 22 & 23 of the decision of Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of DSL Properties (supra) are being reproduced hereunder: "19. "We have carefully considered the rival submissions. Proviso to section 153C reads as under: "Provided that in case of such other person, the reference to the date of initiation of the search u/s 132 or making of requisition u/s 132A in the second proviso to sub-section (1) off section 153A shall be construed as reference to the date of receiving the books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned by the AO having jurisdiction over such other pers ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... alid jurisdiction u/s 153C, even if the AO of the person searched and the AO of such other person is the same, he has to first record the satisfaction in the file of the person searched and thereafter, such note alongwith the seized document/books of account is to be placed in the file of such other person. The date on which this exercise is done would be considered as the date of receiving the books of account or document by the AO having jurisdiction over such other person. Though while examining the facts of the assessee's case we have arrived at the conclusion that no such exercise has been properly carried out and, therefore, initiation of proceedings u/s 153C itself is invalid, however, since both the parties have argued the issue of period of limitation also, we deem it proper to adjudicate the same. Since in this case satisfaction is recorded on 21st June, 2010 and notice u/s 153C is also issued on the same date, then only conclusion that can be drawn is that the AO of such other person has taken over the possession of seized document on 21st June, 2010. Accordingly, as per section 153(1), the AO can issue the notice for the previous year in which search is conducted (f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rson. Thereafter, the AO having jurisdiction over the other person has to proceed against him and issue notice to that person in order to assess or reassess the income of such other person in the manner contemplated by the provisions of section 153A. Now a question may arise as to the applicability of the second proviso to section 153A in the case of the other person, in order to examine the question of pending proceedings which have to abate. In the case of the searched person, the date with reference to which the proceedings for assessment or reassessment of any assessment year within the period of the six assessment years shall abate, is the date of initiation of the search u/s 132 or the requisition u/s 132A. For instance, in the present case, with reference to the Puri Group of Companies, such date will be 5.1.2009. However, in the case of the other person, which in the present case is the petitioner herein, such date will be the date of receiving the books of account or documents or assets seized or requisition by the AO having jurisdiction over such other person. In the case of the other person, the question of pendency and abatement of the proceedings of assessment or reass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
