TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (5) TMI 113
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f condonation of delay, the assessee has filed an application stating that the assessee after the receipt of the order of the Learned CIT (Appeals) was under a bona fide belief that its appeal has been allowed completely and as after appeal affect no tax was demanded from the assessee. Later on, the assessee was advised that there are various inherent contradictions in the order of the Learned CIT (Appeals) and while defending the first appellate order in departmental appeals there may arise some difficulty. Not only that, there are also issues pertaining to acquiring of jurisdiction by the Assessing Officer to initiate the proceedings u/s 153C and consequently framing of assessment order as there was no 'satisfaction' recorded by the Assessing Officer in the case of searched person. It was further submitted that the delay is not caused on account of any latches or mala fide intention but assessee was under sincere and bona fide belief that its appeal has been allowed by the Learned CIT (Appeals). On the other hand, the department has raised various objections for the condonation of delay mainly on the ground that, firstly, once the revenue has preferred any appeal, then the respon....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....utset submitted that the exactly same issue has been considered by the Tribunal in the group cases of the assessee covered under same search and on exactly similar proceedings initiated u/s 153C, namely, Pr. CIT vs. Nikki Drugs Pvt. Ltd. in ITA Nos. 3169 to 3173 and 3026 to 3020/Del/2012; M/s. Flucky Leasing and several others, vide order dated 29.10.2014. He submitted that the Tribunal in the said cases have given a very categorically finding that no 'satisfaction' has been recorded by the Assessing Officer of the person searched who alone is required under the law to record such satisfaction, albeit in all the cases 'satisfaction' has been recorded by the Assessing Officer of the assessee and therefore, in terms of law enshrined in section 153C such a recording of satisfaction does not clothe the Assessing Officer with the jurisdiction to initiate the proceedings u/s 153C and consequently to frame any assessment u/s 153A r.w.s 153C. Here in this case from the perusal of the copy of 'satisfaction note' dated 15.9.2010, copy of which is appearing at page 1 of the paper book, it clearly indicates that it is the Assessing Officer of the assessee who has recorded the satisfaction whic....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....recorded by the ACIT, Central Circle, Meerut which reads as under:- "OFFICE OF THE 'A ASSTT. COMMISSINER OF INCOME TAX X CENTRAL CIRCLE, MEERUT DATED: 15.09.2010 Satisfaction note to initiate proceedings u/s 153C read with section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in the case of M/S Jay Dee Securities & Finance Ltd., 308, Chhabra Complex, 8- Veer Savarkar Block, Shakarpur, New Delhi-92. PANAAACJ2050N A search operation u/s 132(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was conducted in the case of 3 SVP Group of cases and concerned person at various officers and residences by issuing warrants r authorization u/s 132(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 14.10.2008 and various documents cocks of account, other valuable articles and other things were found and seized from various premises. On verification of various documents and books of account found and seized from the business premises of M/S SVP Builders India Ltd., 17, Kiran Enclave, G.T. Road, Ghaziabad, I am satisfied that some documents including following documents belong to M/S Jay Dee Securities & Finance Ltd., 308, Chhabra Complex, 8- Veer Savarkar Block, Shakarpur, New Delhi- 92. Annexure A-39- Pages no. 01 to 2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... person notice and assess or reassess income of such other person in accordance with the provisions of section 153A." From the plain reading of the aforesaid provision it is quite ostensible that the Assessing Officer of the searched person alone must be satisfied that any documents seized or requisition belongs to a person other than the person searched. After having been satisfied the Assessing Officer (of the searched person) shall hand over the seized documents to the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction over such 'other person'. It is only when the Assessing Officer of the 'other person' receives the documents seized or requisition then the Assessing Officer of such person can issue a notice to that person and pass assessment or reassessment order of the income is in accordance with the provision u/s 153A. In other words, at the first stage, the Assessing Officer of the person who has been searched must arrive at a satisfaction that the assets or documents seized does not belong to the searched person but to some 'other person'; in the second stage, that is, after such satisfaction is arrived by the AO of person searched, then he is required to transfer or hand over the as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... various offices and residences by issuing warrants of authorization u/s 132(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 14.10.2016 and various documents, books of account) other valuable articles and other things were found and seized from various premises. On verification of various documents and books of accounts found and seized from some documents including following documents belong to M/s SVP Builders India Ltd., 17, Kiran Enclave, G.T. Road, Ghaziabad, I am satisfied that some documents including following documents belong to M/s Nikki Drugs & Chemicals (P) Ltd. L-119, Shastri Nagar, Delhi -110 052 1 Annexure A-84 (Bunch No. 31) which are various documents like share application form, balance sheet and minutes of meeting of directors in respect of share application money in the shares of M/s SVP Builders India Ltd 2 Annexure A-5 (pages 118-128) which are various documents like resolution affidavit, share application form, acknowledgement receipt of return and P&L A/c/balance sheet in respect of investment for purchase of shares of M/s SVP Builders India Ltd 3 Annexure A-I5 (pages 8-14 & 151-155) M'hich are share certificates of M/s SVP Builders India Ltd. in the name of M/s ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing Officer of the person to whom the said document "belongs". In the present cases it has been urged on behalf of the petitioner that the first step itself has not been fulfilled. For this purpose it would be necessary to examine the provisions of presumptions as indicated above. Section 132(4A)(i) clearly stipulates that when inter alia any document is found in the possession or control of any person in the course of a search it may be presumed that such document belongs to such person. It is similarly provided in Section 292C(1)(i). In other words, whenever a document is found from a person who is being searched the normal presumption is that the said presumption and come to a conclusion or "satisfaction" that the document in fart belongs to somebody else. There must be some cogent material available with the Assessing Officer before he/she arrives at the satisfaction that the seized document does not belong to the searched person but to somebody else. Surmise and conjecture cannot take the place of "satisfaction", In the aforesaid judgment it was further held has under: . "12 It is evident from the above satisfaction note that apart from saying that the docume....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lusion, is that, the legal position as applicable to Section 158BD regarding satisfaction in the first instance of the first Assessing Officer forwarding the items to the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction; and in the second instance of the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction whilst sending notice to such other person (other than the person referred to in Section 153A), must apply proprio vigore. The fact that incidentally the Assessing Officer is common at both the stages would not extricate him from recording satisfaction at the respective stages. In that, the Assessing Officer is satisfied that the items referred to in Section 153C belongs or belong to a person (other than the person referred to in Section 153A), being sine qua non. He cannot assume jurisdiction to transmit those items to another file which incidentally is pending before him concerning other person (person other than the person referred to in Section 153A). The question as to whether that may influence the opinion of the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction over such other person, also cannot be the basis to take any other view. As a matter of fact, the other Assessing Officer to whom the items are handed ....