Tax appeal allowed: AO exceeded s.144C DRP mandate by introducing new findings and recharacterising non-resident receipts as permanent establishment i...
ITAT held that the assumption of jurisdiction u/s 153C was invalid as the seized document, being a copy of a ledger, did not "belong to" the assessee. The document merely recorded a transaction of Rs. 75 lakhs between two third parties, with no reference to the assessee-company. The satisfaction note by the AO incorrectly stated that the assessee had, by letter dated 16.06.2014, accepted the financial transactions reflected in the seized documents; in fact, the letter was filed by another group of companies which had owned the transactions. ITAT held that the AO failed to establish that the seized material pertained to, related to, or belonged to the assessee, and that such material had already been considered in the hands of the other group. Accordingly, the proceedings u/s 153C and the consequential additions were quashed.
ITAT held that the assumption of jurisdiction u/s 153C was invalid as the seized document, being a copy of a ledger, did not "belong to" the assessee. The document merely recorded a transaction of Rs. 75 lakhs between two third parties, with no reference to the assessee-company. The satisfaction note by the AO incorrectly stated that the assessee had, by letter dated 16.06.2014, accepted the financial transactions reflected in the seized documents; in fact, the letter was filed by another group of companies which had owned the transactions. ITAT held that the AO failed to establish that the seized material pertained to, related to, or belonged to the assessee, and that such material had already been considered in the hands of the other group. Accordingly, the proceedings u/s 153C and the consequential additions were quashed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
