Court rules in favor of petitioner, citing lack of jurisdiction in assessment order. Importance of incriminating material specificity stressed.

The court found in favor of the petitioner, holding that the assessment order for AY 2018-19 lacked jurisdiction as the incriminating material found pertained to AY 2021-2022. The court emphasized the importance of incriminating material being specific to the assessment year under consideration, directing the respondents to file counter-affidavits. No immediate action against the petitioner was allowed, pending the next hearing, stressing adherence to Section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

---

---

Issues involved: Challenge to assessment order for AY 2018-19 based on interception at the airport with cash, jurisdiction of assessment order without incriminating material, reliance on judgments, interpretation of Section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Analysis:
1. The writ petition challenges the assessment order for AY 2018-19 issued after the petitioner was intercepted at the airport with Rs.20,00,000 in cash. The petitioner argues that no incriminating material was found for the AY in question, rendering the assessment order without jurisdiction.

2. The petitioner's counsel relies on judgments like Smt. Jami Nirmala, Smt. Smrutisudha Nayak, and others to support the contention that incriminating material should pertain to the relevant AY. The court notes the importance of incriminating material being linked to the specific AY under assessment, as per the decision in CIT v. Kabul Chawla and judgments from different High Courts.

3. The court agrees with the petitioner's argument that incriminating material should be related to the AY in question. Since the incriminating material in this case pertains to AY 2021-2022, the assessment order for AY 2018-19 seems to lack jurisdiction at this stage. Therefore, the court issues notice to the respondents and directs the filing of counter-affidavits within two weeks.

4. The matter is scheduled for the next hearing, and in the interim, no hasty action shall be taken against the petitioner regarding the assessment year in question. The judgment emphasizes the necessity of incriminating material being specific to the AY under assessment, as per the provisions of Section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

This comprehensive analysis of the judgment highlights the issues raised, the arguments presented, and the court's interpretation of the law and relevant precedents in determining the jurisdiction of the assessment order.

---