TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (4) TMI 470
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ture as assessment has not been framed on the seized pursuant to an action taken under section 132 of the Act but the reassessment and change of opinion has been made as such the order passed is illegal and therefore, is liable to be quashed. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and facts by confirmed the addition of Rs. 3,13,00,000/- as unexplained cash credit u/s.68 of the I.T. Act, 1961. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in not considering the additional evidence filed. 4. The assessee craves leave for addition, notification, deletion, any of grounds of appeal either before the hearing of appeal or at the time of appeal. 3. The grounds raised in ITANo. 1335/Del/2014(AY 2003-04) read as under:- 1. That the impugned order is bad in law, in nature as assessment has not been framed on the seized pursuant to an action taken under section 132 of the Act but the reassessment and change of opinion has been made as such the order passed is illegal and therefore, is liable to be quashed. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and facts by confirmed the addition of Rs. 1,10,00,000/- as unexplained cash credit u/s.68 of the I.T. Act, 1961. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in not considering the additio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ions which were not based on the incriminating material found and seized during the course of search. ITA NO. 1245/DEL/2014 (AY 2005-06) [GLOBAL REALTY CREATIONS LTD. VS. DCIT) 7. The brief facts of the case are that a search and seizure operation was carried out u/s. 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in Rajdarbar Group of cases on 31.07.2008. During search operation certain document were seized which belong to the assessee company. The case of the assessee company was transferred to CC-5, New Delhi u/s. 127 of the I.T. Act, 1961 by the orders of Ld. CIT(Central)-I, Delhi. Notice u/s. 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 23.7.2010 was issued to the assessee company but the same returned as unserved. Again notice u/s. 153C was issued at the new address of the assessee company on 2.8.2010, requiring it to file the return for the assessment year 2005-06. Return of income for the assessment year 2005-06 was filed by the assessee on 13.8.2010 declaring NIL income. The return filed by the assessee company is the same as that of filed under section 139 of the Act on 22.3.2006. Notice u/s. 143(2) was issued to the assessee on 9.9.2010 fixing the case for hearing and further notice....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ounsel of the assessee on the admission of additional ground has stated that the additional grounds are on the assumption of jurisdiction u/s.153C of the I.T. Act besides the scope of assessment u/s.153/153A of the Income Tax Act. It was further submitted that it is settled law that the additional grounds of appeal which are legal in nature or which raises question of law or which involve interpretation of circular /notification etc. can be taken up first time at any level of adjudication. Even those additional grounds which are based on fresh evidences are also normally admitted if the additional evidences are found admissible in accordance with Rule 29 of the ITAT Rules. Ld. Counsel of the assessee during the course of hearing, specifically relied on two judgements of this Tribunal. The first one was in the case of one of the assessee in this set of appeal i.e. Global Heritage Venture Ltd. In this matter for the AY 2009-10 (ITA Number 3197/Del/2013) which was decided on 21/06/2016 similar question of law was raised by way of additional/revised ground and the Hon'ble Tribunal not only admitted the additional grounds but also ruled in favor of the assessee on the same. He further r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....llect more tax out of him than is legitimately due from him." 10.2 It was argued that the above circular has been judicially noted and approved in many judgments and has been relied upon in support of the assessees' claim. 10.3 The Ld AR further relied upon several case laws to argue his case in favor of admission of additional grounds and requested that keeping in view of the following decisions, the additional grounds raised by the assessee may be admitted and decided first. National Thermal Power Co.Ltd. Vs. C.I.T., 229 ITR 383 (SC) Jute Corporation of India Ltd. v. CIT (1991) 187 ITR 688 Sayaji Mills Ltd. (1974) 94 ITR 26 (Guj.) Steel Ingots (P.) Ltd. Vs. C.I.T., 86 Taxman 440 (MP) C.I.T. Vs. Bhopal Sugar Industries Ltd., 233 ITR 429 (MP) Ramlal V/s. Rewa Coalfields Ltd. AIR 162 S.C.361 Navnitlal C. Zaveri V/s. K K Sent, ACIT Bombay 56 ITR 198 (S.C) Chokshi Metal Refinery V/s. CIT 107 ITR 63 (Guj) CIT v. Jai Parbolic Springs Ltd. (2008) 306 ITR 42 (Del.) CIT v. Natraj Stationery Products (P) Ltd., (2009) 312 ITR 222 CIT v. Rose Services Apartment India P. Ltd., [2010] 326 ITR 100 (Delhi) CIT v. Jindal Saw Pipes Ltd., [2010] 328 I....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ining to the appellant. Even in the assessment order, no such mention has been made. This indicates how irrelevant these documents were to the assessment of the appellant. v. No satisfaction note has been recorded by the assessing officer(s) of the entity/entities from whose premises the documents etc. were seized regarding the satisfaction of that assessing officer(s) that he/they found the documents belonged to the appellant. It is necessary that the assessing officer of the entity in whose hands the documents/ asset was seized records a satisfaction that the document/ asset belonged to some other entity. This has been repeatedly held to be necessary for invoking jurisdiction u/s 153C by higher judicial authorities including the jurisdictional High Court. Section 153C of the Act for ready reference is reproduced herewith:- "153C.(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in section 139, section 147, section 148, section 149, section 151 and section 153, where the Assessing Officer is satisfied that any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing or books of account or documents seized or requisitioned belongs or belong to a person other than the person re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ection 143 has expired, or (c) assessment or reassessment, if any, has been made, before the date of receiving the books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned by the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction over such other person, such Assessing Officer shall issue the notice and assess or reassess total income of such other person of such assessment year in the manner provided in section 153A" Very recently Hon'ble Delhi High Court had an occasion to look at the conditions required to be fulfilled before initiating an action under section 153C of the Income Tax Act. Two orders in the case of PepsiCo India Holdings (P.) Ltd v ACIT [2014] 50 taxmann.com 299 (Delhi) & Pepsi Foods Pvt. Ltd v ACIT [W.P. (C) 415/2014 & CM 823/2014]are also filed with the submission at Pg numbers 132 to 139 of Paper Book. In the matter of Pepsi Foods Pvt. Ltd., Hon'ble Delhi High Court has ruled as below:- "11. It is evident from the above satisfaction note that apart from saying that the documents belonged to the petitioner and that the Assessing Officer is satisfied that it is a fit case for issuance of a notice under Section 153C, there is nothing which would indi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ched person must be satisfied that the seized material (which includes documents) does not belong to the person referred to in Section 153A (i.e., the searched person). In the Satisfaction Note, which is the subject matter of these writ petitions, there is nothing therein to indicate that the seized documents do not belong to the Jaipuria Group. This is even apart from the fact that, as we have noted above, there is no disclaimer on the part of the Jaipuria Group insofar as these documents are concerned. 15. Secondly, we may also observe that the finding of photocopies in the possession of a searched person does not necessarily mean and imply that they "belong" to the person who holds the originals. Possession of documents and possession of photocopies of documents are two separate things. While the Jaipuria Group may be the owner of the photocopies of the documents it is quite possible that the originals may be owned by some other person. Unless it is established that the documents in question, whether they be photocopies or originals, do not belong to the searched person, the question of invoking Section 153C of the said Act does not arise. 16. Thirdly, we would....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f Section 153A and 153C the exercise that is required to be done by the AO has been spelt out by the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of DSL Properties Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT 33 Taxman.com 420 vide para 15 has held that if the Assessing Officer is assessing the person searched as well as other person whose assets, books of account or documents were found at the time of search, then also, first while making the assessment in the case of the person searched, he has to record the satisfaction that the money bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing or books of account or documents belonged to the person other than the person searched. Then the copy of this satisfaction note is to be placed in the file of such other person and the relevant document should also be transferred from the file of the person searched to the file of such other person. Thereafter, in the capacity of the Assessing Officer of such other person, he has to issue the notice u/s 153A read with section 153C. The Assessing Officer of the searched person and such other person may be the same but these are two different assessees and therefore the Assessing Officer has to carry out the dual exercise....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nvestment Ltd. are as below: "24. In the light of the order of the co-ordinate bench in the case of M/s. V.K.Fiscal Services Pvt. Ltd (supra) and the ratio of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Pepsico India Holiday (P) Ltd (supra), we hold that the AO lacks jurisdiction to initiate the 153C proceeding against the assessee and therefore the issuance of notice itself is null and void and therefore quashed. Consequently the impugned assessment order u/s 153C is also a nullity. 25. Since we have quashed the initiation and the notice issued by the AO u/s 153Cof the Act itself, the other grounds are not adjudicated being academic." Hon'ble Delhi High Court has affirmed the quashing of 153C assessments in the group cases mentioned above. All these orders are placed in the Paper book as per the details below; Name of Assessee Page no. of paper book M/s Global Heritage Venture Ltd 18 M/s Natural Product Bio-Tech Ltd 35-37 M/s Nageshwar Investment Ltd. 48-51 Hon'ble High Court held as below in the group entity Nageshwar Investment's case; " The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has in the common impugned order d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... disc found in the premises of the searched entity i.e. Global Heritage Venture Pvt. Ltd. belonged to the Assessee for the purposes of section 153C of the Act as it stood prior approval to its amendment with effect from 1st June 2015? The ITAT has found, and in this view of this Court Correctly, that the AO failed to record his satisfaction in that regard in terms of the law as explained by the court in Pepsico India Holdings (P) Ltd. vs. ACIT [2015] 371 ITR 295 (Del.) This Court has by this order dated 8th July, 2015 is dismissed the Revenue's Appeal ITA NO. 373/2015 (Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-1 vs. Global Heritage Venture Ltd.) and by the order dated 20th July 2015 dismissed the Revenue's appeals ITA No. 406-409/2015 (Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-1 vs. Nageshwar Investment Ltd.) all of which involve a similar question." Recent decision in the case of RRJ Securities is also brought to the kind attention of the Hon'ble Tribunal. In this matter apart from reiterating various propositions of law as laid down in Pepsi, Hon'ble Court has laid down unambiguously that even if the AO of the searched person and the other person in whose case ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ch satisfaction is recorded would be the date on which the AO assumes possession of the seized assets/documents in his capacity as an AO of the person other than the one searched. ...... 33. The record slip belongs to the Assessee and, therefore, the action of the AO of the searched persons recording that the same belongs to the Assessee cannot be faulted. However, the question then arises is whether the AO of the Assessee was justified in taking further steps for reassessing the income of the Assessee in respect of the assessment years for which the assessments were concluded and in respect of which the seized document had no bearing. In our view, the same would be clearly impermissible as the seized material now available with the AO, admittedly, had no nexus with those assessments and was wholly irrelevant for the purpose of assessing the income of the Assessee for the years in question. Merely because a valuable article or document belonging to an Assessee is seized from the possession of a person searched under Section 132 of the Act, does not mean that the concluded assessments of the Assessee are necessarily to be re-opened under Section 153C of the Act. In....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to in sub-section (1) of section 153A "153C.(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in section 139, section 147, section 148, section 149, section 151 and section 153, where the Assessing Officer is satisfied that any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing or books of account or documents seized or requisitioned belongs or belong to a person other than the person referred to in section 153A, then the books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned shall be handed over to the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction over such other person and that Assessing Officer shall proceed against each such other person and issue such other person notice and assess or reassess income of such other person in accordance with the provisions of section 153A From the changes made, it can be seen that the changes brought specifically stresses the requirements of the satisfaction of the assessing officer intending action under section 153C w.r. to the relevance of the document on the determination of total income of the other person then only action under section 153C is required to be taken. This amendment is in consonance with the judicial interpre....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... be withdrawn/not pressed if it does not meet the guidelines laid down by the Apex Court. Considering the aforesaid position of law, its interpretation by the jurisdictional High Court and the jurisdictional Tribunal and the Circular issued by the Board, the manner in which satisfaction note has been recorded and also the contents of the assessment order itself clearly establishes that the exercise of jurisdiction under section 153C by the Ld. AO was incorrect and for this reason alone the assessments u/s 153C need to be set aside/quahed as the same violates the following propositions of law held in the various judgments referred in the earlier parts of this submission. 1. It is necessary that the satisfaction is recorded by the assessing officer of the entity in whose case the document/ asset has been seized to the effect that the relevant document/ asset belong to the other person in whose case action under section 153C is contemplated. 2. It is essential to establish that the document belongs to the person in whose case action u/s 153C is contemplated. 3. The assessing officer of the entity before initiating process under section 153C has to record a separate satisfa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....009 dated 28.03.2013 iii. Alcargo Global Logistics Ltd Vs DCIT (2012) 137 ITR 287/23 Taxmann.com-103 (Mum) (SB) iv. Anil Kumar Bhatia (2012) 211 Taxmann.com 453 (Delhi)/2013 352 ITR 493 v. ACIT v. Pratibha Industries (2012) 28 Taxmann.com (Mum.) vi. Pradeep Kumar Kumra ITA No. 4016/Delhi/2011 dated 07/11/2013 vii. MGF Automobiles Ltd ITA No 4212 & 4213/Del/2011 dated 28/06/2013 viii. Jai Steel (India) Jodhpur vs. ACIT ITA No. 53/2011 order dated 24/05/2011 ix. JCIT Vs. Spectrum Pearls & Exports Pvt. Ltd. ITA No. 2107 to 2113/Hyd./2011 order dated 04/04/2012 x. Sanjay Aggarwal Vs. DCIT ITA No. 3184/Del/2013 Order dated 16/06/2014 xi. Dream Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. ITA No. 5392/Del/2012 Order dated 22/11/2013 xii. ShriGovindAgarwal vs. ACIT ITA No. 339/Mum/2011 dated 10.01.2014 xiii. Jail Steel (India) Ltd (Rajasthan HC) 219 Taxmann 223 dated 24.05.2013 xiv. PACL India Ltd ITA No. 2637/Del/2010 dated 20.06.2013; [2013]-TIOL-734-ITAT-DEL. xv. Jakson Engineering Ltd. ITA No. 349 & 350/ Del/2013 dated 11/04/2014 xvi. VK Fiscal Services (P) Ltd. ITA No. 5460 to 5465/D/2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is of evidence found in the course of the search, or other post-search material or information available with the AO which can be related to the evidence found, it does not mean that the assessment "can be arbitrary or made without any relevance or nexus with the seized material. Obviously an assessment has to be made under this Section only on the basis of seized material." v. In absence of any incriminating material, the completed assessment can be reiterated and the abated assessment or reassessment can be made. The word 'assess' in Section 153 A is relatable to abated proceedings (i.e. those pending on the date of search) and the word 'reassess' to completed assessment proceedings. vi. Insofar as pending assessments are concerned, the jurisdiction to make the original assessment and the assessment under Section 153A merges into one. Only one assessment shall be made separately for each AY on the basis of the findings of the search and any other material existing or brought on the record of the AO. vii. Completed assessments can be interfered with by the AO while making the assessment under Section 153 A only on the basis of some incrim....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....various propositions of law concerning assessments under section 153C and 153A. 11. On the contrary, Ld. CIT(DR) strongly opposed the admission of additional grounds (legal) raised by the assessee. In support of his contention, he filed the WS on behalf of the Revenue (on admission of Additional ground) which read as under:- "1.1 There is no quarrel that courts have ruled that appellate authorities have powers to entertain new claim. However, this does not mean that it is a privilege of the assessee to get any claim entertained at any stage as per assessee's sweet will. 1.2 The basic jurisdiction of ITAT is from 253(1) which drives jurisdiction from the position that the appellant (assessee) should be aggrieved by the order of the lower authority(impugned order). Once a ground has not been taken before lower authority, the question of being aggrieved does not arise. Therefore, in normal course, these ground is beyond the scope of the appeal as per provisions contained in section 253(1). 1.3 As a natural corollary, it is necessary to pin point with reference to the impugned order as to where exactly the lower authority erred. However, in present case, the Assessee ha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sufficient opportunity of being heard on that ground."(emphasis supplied). 3.4 The provisions of section 124(3) of the IT Act, 1961 is in conformity to this fundamental rule and reads as under, "(3) No person shall be entitled to call in question the jurisdiction of an Assessing Officer- (a) where he has made a return under sub-section (1) of section 115WD or under sub-section (1) of section 139~ after the expiry of one month from the date on which he was served with a notice under sub-section (l) of section 142 or sub-section (2) of section 115WE or sub-section (2) of section i43 or after the completion of the assessment, whichever is earlier; (b) where he has made no such return, after the expiry of the time allowed by the notice under sub-section (2) of section 115WD or sub-section (1) of section 142 or under sub-section (1) of section 115WH or under section 148 for the making of the return or by the notice under the first proviso to section 115WF or under the first proviso to section 144] to show cause why the assessment should not be completed to the best of the judgment of the Assessing Officer, whichever is earlier." 3.5 The provisions of Rule 46A of the IT Ru....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ourt in case of GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer [2002] 125 TAXMAN 963 (SC) is in conformity to this fundamental rule and the relevant portion reads as under, "....... However, we clarify that when a notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act is issued, the proper course .of action for the noticee is to file return and if he so desires, to seek reasons for issuing notices. The Assessing Officer is bound to furnish reasons within a reasonable time. On receipt of reasons, the noticee is entitled to file objections to issuance of notice and the Assessing Officer is bound to dispose .of the same by passing a speaking order." 3.9 The ratio of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Additional CIT Vs. Gurjargravures P. Ltd. {1978] 111 ITR 1 (SC) { that claim for exemption not made before AO and no material on record supporting such claim cannot be made before AAC is in conformity to this fundamental rule and the relevant portion of head notes reads as under, "Held, reversing the decision of the High Court, that, as neither was any claim made before the Income-tax Officer regarding the relief under section 84 nor was there any material on record in support ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....its own facts. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner must be satisfied that the ground raised was bona fide and that the same could 11ut nave been raised earlier for gaud reasons. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner should exercise his discretion in permitting or not permitting the assessee to raise an additional ground in accordance with Jaw and reason. The same observations would apply to appeals before the Tribunal also."(emphasis supplied). 3.13 From the above, it can be summarized that this power can be exercised in the cases where assessee proves that (at least) all the following conditions are satisfied: 1) There are really exceptional circumstances to exercise the power vested in the Appellate Authority. 2) There were circumstances beyond control of the assessee due to which claim c.ould not be made at the earliest possible. opportunity. 3) All the facts related to the issue are already before the appellate authority. 4) No prejudice would be caused to the revenue by entertaining the claim at this stage vis-a-vis the time when it should have been made for the first time as per prescribed procedure. 4.1 It is not the simple case that grounds being raised no....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....atively) that i) There exist really exceptional circumstances where exercise of this power is necessary, ii) beyond any show of doubt, there were circumstances which prevented it from making such claim at earliest point of time, and iii) No prejudice shall be cast upon the revenue if such claim is entertained, now. 6.5.2 Assesee has failed to demonstrate that any of the above conditions is fulfilled (what to talk of fulfilling all). 7.1 Also, from the above, it is clear that the assessee has to demonstrate that fact on the basis 'of which the issue of law can be raised are already before the Appellate Authority. 7.2 The assessee has no where demonstrated that the facts which are necessary to adjudicate the claim are already before, Hon'ble ITAT. Assessee's new ground would require examination of contents of seized Hard Disk as the same has been mentioned in the satisfaction note and contents of the Hard Disk is not before the Hon'hle ITAT. 8.1 Even in a situation where the assessee is able to demonstrate that the facts which are necessary to adjudicate the ground are already before, Hon'ble ITAT, it is not mandatory to accept such claim. The....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... satisfaction notes i.e. one by the AO of the searched person and other by the AO of the other person. Other point emphasized by the Ld DR was that in these judgements it has been held that the term 'belonged to' must not be too literally interpreted rather the meaning of 'belonged to' should be seen akin to related to. It was also stated that these rulings held that one should not be hyper technical with regard to satisfaction note. 11.2 Ld. DR reiterated the written submissions as mentioned above and further relied upon the orders of the authorities below and stated that the provision of section 153 has rightly been applied in the case of the assessee on the material available with them and further stated that the case of the assessee is covered against the assessee by the decision dated 22.11.2016 of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Pr. CIT vs. M/s Super Malls Pvt. Ltd. passed in ITA No. 449/16 & Ors. Reported in 2016-TIOL-2953-HC-DEL-IT and decision dated 3.2.2017 passed in the case of Pr. CIT vs. M/s Nau Nidh Overseas Pvt. Ltd. reported in 2017-TIOL-389-HCV-DEL-IT. 12. However, Ld. Counsel of the assessee in his counter arguments has stated that the facts o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ia Holdings (P.) Ltd v ACIT [2014] 50 taxmann.com 299 (Delhi) & Pepsi Foods Pvt. Ltd v ACIT [W.P. (C) 415/2014 & CM 823/2014, RRJ Securities , CIT V/s Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 573. Law laid down by the aforesaid detailed rulings of the Hon'ble Court can be summed up as under; 1. It is necessary that the satisfaction is recorded by the assessing officer of the entity in whose case the document/ asset has been seized to the effect that the relevant document/ asset belong to the other person in whose case action under section 153C is contemplated. 2. It is essential to establish that the document belongs to the person in whose case action u/s 153C is contemplated. 3. Mere photocopies or the data copy doesn't lead to inference that the data copy/photo copy belonged to the person two whom original belonged to. 4. Entries in a dairy do not necessarily mean that the diary belonged to everyone whose name is mentioned in that diary. 5. The assessing officer of the entity before initiating process under section 153C has to record a separate satisfaction that the document/ asset belong to the person in whose case action under section 153C is required to be initiated and also he has....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s/interpretation of law as detailed above are as under; 1. Rajeev Behl ( ITA- 84 to 86/2017) Date of order: 06/02/2017 2. Gurnam Arora ( ITA- 669/2016) Date of order: 10/02/2017 3. Baba Global Ltd ( ITA 938/2016) Date of order 23/12/2016 4. DMA Investments Pvt Ltd ( ITA-767-768/2016) Date of order 04/11/2016 5. Marichika Properties Pvt Ltd ( ITA 633/634/2016) date of order 19/10/2016 13. We have heard both the parties and perused the records and the case laws relied upon by both the parties, we are of the considered view that the additional grounds are on the assumption of jurisdiction u/s 153C of the Act besides the scope of assessment u/s 153A/153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961. In our opinion, the additional grounds of appeal are in the nature of legal and it is well settled law that the additional grounds of appeal which are legal in nature or which raises question of law or which involve interpretation of circular/notification etc can be taken up first time at any level of adjudication. Even those additional grounds which are based on fresh evidences are also normally admitted if the additional evidences are found admissible in accordance with Rule 29 of the IT....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....w of the facts and circumstances of the case circumstances of the case, we are of the view that the additional grounds raised by the assessee are purely legal grounds and do not require fresh facts which is to be investigated and goes to the root of the matter. In the interest of justice, we admit the following two common additional grounds raised by the assessee. 1. "The Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in confirming the assessment of the appellant passed without satisfying the substantive and procedural requirements under section 153C of the Income Tax Act. 2. Without prejudice to the other grounds of appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in confirming the additions which were not based on the incriminating material found and seized during the course of search." 13.2 Keeping in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and for the sake of convenience, we proceed to adjudicate upon the common legal additional ground no. 2 only. 13.3 Ld. CIT(DR) has brought to our notice two recent cases decided by Hon'ble Delhi High Court. One is ITA number 58 of 2017 in the case of Nau Nidh Overseas Pvt Ltd by Order dated Feb 03....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ompanies who were subjected to the 153C proceedings. Also, there was no dispute in these two cases (either from the searched party or the other party) as to whom the documents/assets belonged to. On account of these compelling and exceptional circumstances, it appears; the Hon'ble Court held that the law should not be interpreted too literally. 13.7 After perusing the assessment order as well as appellate order, we find that in the present case the AO has completed the assessment u/s. 153C of the I.T. Act, 1961 and made the addition in dispute without any incriminating material found during the search and seizure operation and the addition in this case was purely based on the material already available on record, which is not sustainable in the eyes of law, hence, needs to be deleted. Also on the perusal of the assessment order undisputedly indicates that no reference whatsoever has been made to any material found/ seized during the course of search. Our aforesaid view is fully supported by the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT V/s Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 573, wherein the Hon'ble High Court has held has under:- "37. On a conspectus of Section 153A(1) of....