https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759381 The ITAT Delhi held that an assessment order passed u/s 143(3) was invalid as it should have been conducted u/s 153C. The AO recorded satisfaction on 10-10-2022 regarding seized documents relating to the assessee for AY 2015-16 to 2020-21, but issued notice u/s 143(2) instead of u/s 153C. Following precedent, the Tribunal determined that the deemed date of possession of seized documents was 03-10-2022, making AY 2023-24 the relevant assessment year, with the six-year period covering AY 2018-19 to 2022-23. Since assessment for AY 2021-22 fell within this period, it required proceedings u/s 153C, not u/s 143(2). The assessment order dated 29-12-22 was quashed as bad in law. en-us Thu, 26 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 28 Sep 2024 11:01:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759381 The ITAT Delhi held that an assessment order passed u/s 143(3) was invalid as it should have been conducted u/s 153C. The AO recorded satisfaction on 10-10-2022 regarding seized documents relating to the assessee for AY 2015-16 to 2020-21, but issued notice u/s 143(2) instead of u/s 153C. Following precedent, the Tribunal determined that the deemed date of possession of seized documents was 03-10-2022, making AY 2023-24 the relevant assessment year, with the six-year period covering AY 2018-19 to 2022-23. Since assessment for AY 2021-22 fell within this period, it required proceedings u/s 153C, not u/s 143(2). The assessment order dated 29-12-22 was quashed as bad in law. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 26 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759381