AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (1) TMI 651
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ief facts of the case are that during search and seizure action u/s 132 of the IT Act carried out at Gopal Zarda group of companies on 15.1.2009, certain documents belonging to the assessee company were found and seized. Accordingly, after recording reasons notices u/s 153C read with section 153A of the Act dated 13.9.2010 were issued requiring the assessee firm to file return of income within 16 days of service of notice. As per assessment order, the assessee failed to file return of income within stipulated period and therefore a notice u/s 142(1) dated 5.10.2010 along with questionnaire were issued requiring the assessee to file return of income along with in other details. In response to these notices, the assessee filed letter dated 25....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at Assessing Officer completed assessment u/s 153C read with sec. 143(3) instead of section 153C read with section 144 of the Act which proves beyond doubt that appellant had filed required details and secondly the Assessing Officer has rejected the books of accounts u/s 145(3) which proves that after verification of books of accounts, the Ld Assessing Officer was not satisfied about the completeness and correctness of the accounts of the appellant. b) That the Assessing Officer has failed to provide copies of documents seized from persons subject to search & seizure from whose premises, the documents belonging to the appellant company were found. It was also submitted that Assessing Officer failed to make reference of such do....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....essment proceedings u/s 153A read with section 153C of the Act without providing copy of reasons recorded for initiation of assessment proceedings. 4. The Ld CIT(A) obtained a remand report from Assessing Officer regarding as to whether copies of documents and copy of reasons were provided to the assessee or not. The Assessing Officer vide remand report submitted that assessee had never filed any requisition for copy of satisfaction as well as copies of documents based on which the satisfaction for initiating proceedings u/s 153C of the act were recorded. In his rejoinder, the assessee submitted that Assessing Officer has wrongly mentioned in remand report that appellant had not submitted any requisition and in this respect it was stated t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pellant. It has also been argued that the provisions of section 153C do not give unfettered and arbitrary power to initiate proceedings u/s 153C of the IT Act to assess or reassess case of the assessee for six assessment years. It has also been submitted that the AO has not even mentioned the date on which the satisfaction was recorded, which proved beyond doubt that the said satisfaction was not recorded before initiation of proceedings U/S 153C, as the AO failed to provide copy of the same even though specific request was made by the appellant for the same, on receipt of notice U/S 153C by the assessee. I have carefully gone through the satisfaction note recorded in the case of "Gopal Zarda Group" by the AO. While the same i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....S 153C of the IT Act unless these are prima facie indicative of unaccounted/unrecorded transactions. In view thereof it is held that since there is no valid satisfaction u/s 153C in this case therefore the assessment proceedings itself are liable to be quashed and Ground Nos. 3 & 4 are accordingly allowed in favour of the appellant. Finding on Grounds of Appeal No.1 & 2:- Since the proceedings u/s 153C itself have been quashed there is no requirement to adjudicate the case with reference to the merits of the addition to income made for Rs.36,80,000/-. However even on merits it is seen that the entire addition to income has been based on rejection of the books of accounts by invoking section 145(3) of the IT Act b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....1.36 of his submission dated 23.04.2012 and concluded that the AO has erred both in fact and in law in making addition by estimating income on estimated sales without bringing in any material on record to substantiate that sales are not fully accounted for in the books of accounts and therefore it has been requested that the addition of Rs.36,80,000/- is liable to be deleted." Similar findings were made by ld CIT(A) in respect of assessment year 2007-08. 5. Aggrieved with the order the revenue is in appeal before us. 6. At the outset, the Ld DR referred to pages 36 to 38 of Ld CIT(A)'s order and submitted that all documents narrated by ld CIT(A) were seized and assessee has submitted that these are acknowledgement of returns and copy of ....