TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Procedural Flaws Invalidate Tax Assessment: Unsigned Agreement and Seized Chats Render Order Unsustainable Under Section 153C(1)</h1> <h3>Ms. Ritu Bhuttan Versus DCIT, Central Circle-31, New Delhi</h3> ITAT Delhi quashed an income tax assessment order for non-compliance with section 153C(1). The Tribunal found the assessment invalid due to procedural ... Validity of the impugned section 143(3) proceedings/assessment - Departmental authorities had carried out a search in question at the premises of Third party/Sh. Parveen K. Jain thereby coming across the assessee’s alleged agreement indicating unexplained investment(s) forming subject matter of ad judication before us - departmental authorities had deciphered the same on the basis of whatsapp chats which formed part of the seized material as a “document” as per section 2(22AA) of the Act. HELD THAT:- We are of the considered view in this factual backdrop that once the above alleged agreements formed part of the seized material, the impugned “normal” assessment could not be held as sustainable in law since not framed as per the specific provisions of section 153C(1) of the Act. We thus quash the same for this precise reason and the assessee’s all other remaining pleadings stand rendered academic in very terms. This assessee’s appeal is allowed. The Appellate Tribunal (ITAT Delhi) in the appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year 2021-22 against the CIT(A)-30's order under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, addressed the validity of the impugned assessment dated 30.12.2022. The assessment arose following a search on 06.01.2021 at Sh. Parveen K. Jain's premises, where an alleged agreement dated 26.11.2020 was found, purportedly evidencing unexplained investments.The Tribunal noted the agreement was unsigned and relied upon WhatsApp chats seized during the search, which the Revenue classified as a 'document' under section 2(22AA). However, the Tribunal held that since the alleged agreement was part of seized material, the assessment could not be validly framed under the 'normal' provisions of section 143(3), but had to comply with the specific requirements of section 153C(1).Accordingly, the Tribunal quashed the assessment order as not sustainable in law for non-compliance with section 153C(1), rendering all other contentions academic. The appeal was allowed.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
