TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (8) TMI 45
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....8391- on the facts of the case. 4. Without prejudice, the income ought to have been estimated at 5% or in extreme case 8% of Rs. 3,27,14,2791- on the facts of the case. 5. The CIT-A erred in enhancing the assessment by making additions of Rs. 57,81,981/- on the facts of the case. 6. The enhancement made by the commissioner is on wrong appreciation of facts and requires to be made Nil under the facts of the case. 7. The authorities below failed to appreciate that the conditions mentioned under section 132 of the Act did not exist and consequently the search itself is not valid on the facts and circumstances of the case. 8. The authorities below erred and ought to have satisfied themselves that the mandatory conditions for action under section 132 exist and then only issued notices for assessments on the facts and circumstances of the case. Thus the authorities below ought to have examined the validity of search proceedings for assumption of jurisdiction under Chapter XIV of the Act. 9. The orders of the authorities below are bad in law as the mandatory conditions to invoke the jurisdiction under section 153C of the Act did not ex....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 4.1 The assessee has also raised the grounds for validity of assessment under Section 153C under Ground No.9. This issue goes to the root of the matter. Therefore we first take up the jurisdictional issue of validity of assessment under Section 153C of the Act. The assessee has also raised this issue in the additional ground filed vide petition dt.8.6.2016. 5. The learned Authorised Representative of the assessee has submitted that as per the requirement of the law the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction over the searched person as well as the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction of the assessee was required to record the satisfaction that undisclosed income belongs to any persons other than the persons with respect to whom a search was made under Section 132 of the Act before initiating the proceedings under Section 153C of the Act. The learned Authorised Representative has pointed out that the CIT (Appeals) has though reproduced the satisfaction note in the impugned order however it is not clear in whose assessment record this satisfaction was recorded by the Assessing Officer. Thus the learned Authorised Representative has submitted that even otherwise the satisfaction ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e searched person. Section 153C conferred the authority and jurisdiction to the Assessing Officer of a person searched as well as other than the searched person to examine the documents and other assets seized during the search and to ascertain that they do reflect undisclosed income of the person other than the searched person. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Calcutta Knitwears (supra) while considering the validity of initiating the proceedings under Section 158BD has held in paras 43 & 44 as under : " 43. In the lead case, the assessing officer had prepared a satisfaction note on 15.07.2005 though the assessment proceedings in the case of a searched person, namely, S.K. Bhatia were completed on 30.03.2005. As we have already noticed, the Tribunal and the High Court are of the opinion that since the satisfaction note was prepared after the proceedings were completed by the assessing officer under Section 158BC of the Act which is contrary to the provisions of Section 158BD read with Section 158BE(2)(b) and therefore, have dismissed the case of the Revenue. In our considered opinion, the reasoning of the learned Judges of the High Court is contrary to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....see for the relevant assessment years, that further enquiry would be warranted in respect of those years. Whilst, it is not necessary for the AO to be satisfied that the assets/documents seized during search of another person reflect undisclosed income of an Assessee before commencing an enquiry under Section 153C of the Act, it would be impermissible for him to commence such enquiry if it is apparent that the documents/assets in question have no bearing on the income of the Assessee for the relevant assessment years. 37. As expressly indicated under Section 153C of the Act the assessment or reassessment of income of a person other than a searched person would proceed in accordance with the provisions of Section 153A of the Act. The concluded assessments cannot be interfered with under Section 153A of the Act unless the incriminating material belonging to the Assessee has been seized. 38. As indicated above, in the present case, the documents seized had no relevance or bearing on the income of the Assessee for the relevant assessment years and could not possibly reflect any undisclosed income." The Hon'ble High Court has held that the Assessing Officer is r....