https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342224 HC held that the documents seized from the premises of a third party, namely a letter written by the assessee and an extract of its ledger account showing commission payments, could not validly support initiation of proceedings under s.153C. The ledger extract, even if belonging to the assessee, was not incriminating and pertained only to AY 2010-11, for which a regular scrutiny assessment under s.143(3) had already examined and accepted the disclosed commission payments. It could not justify reopening AYs 2007-08 to 2009-10, 2011-12, and 2012-13. Consequently, the assessments under s.153C were quashed in favour of the assessee. en-us Tue, 25 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 26 Nov 2025 18:09:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342224 HC held that the documents seized from the premises of a third party, namely a letter written by the assessee and an extract of its ledger account showing commission payments, could not validly support initiation of proceedings under s.153C. The ledger extract, even if belonging to the assessee, was not incriminating and pertained only to AY 2010-11, for which a regular scrutiny assessment under s.143(3) had already examined and accepted the disclosed commission payments. It could not justify reopening AYs 2007-08 to 2009-10, 2011-12, and 2012-13. Consequently, the assessments under s.153C were quashed in favour of the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 25 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342224