TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (2) TMI 191
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....partment conducted searches of the residential premises of the assessee under Section 132 on 02.03.2005 and 20.04.2005. A notice was issued under Section 153A of the Act on 06.01.2006, alleging inter alia that the assessee entered into transactions of a property having total extent of 16 cents; 8 cents of which was sold in the assessment year 1999-2000 and the balance 8 cents in the assessment year 2000-2001. The assessee had returned a total amount of Rs. 32,00,000/- as consideration; 16 lakhs in each of the assessment years. Two documents received, before the search, by the Department through a Tax Evasion Petition, allegedly filed by one of the brokers involved in the transaction, revaled the total consideration as Rs. 1,01,00,000/-. The assessee died on 24.02.2006 and the appellant, filed a return on 09.10.2006, accepting the total consideration to be Rs. 60,00,000/-, more than that returned originally. Returns were filed for the respective years showing a receipt of Rs. 44,00,000/- in the financial year 1998-99 and Rs. 16,00,000/- in the financial year 1999-2000. A notice under Section 143 was issued on 29.10.2006, pursuant to which the assessment orders were passed for the re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... was conducted, was rejected confirming the findings of the first appellate authority. The Tribunal also found that there was no mandate in Section 153A, as to the proceedings being confined to the material seized in the search. On the documents relied on by the Department, the consent letters; the Tribunal found that the statement of the witnesses showed that the consent letters were signed in the presence of the buyer. There were also amounts paid to the assessee through other persons who did not have sufficient means and who deposed before the Assessing Officer that they had encashed the cheques and passed over the amounts to the husband of the assessee. It was also found that the Assessing Officer had verified the Bank account of the purchaser and noticed that he has withdrawn Rs. 50,50,000/- after the registration of the first deed which was on 01.07.1998. The said withdrawal was also equivalent to the sale price of the remaining 8 cents of land, which was registered on 10.05.1999. The Tribunal, hence, upheld the order of the Assessing Officer, reversing to that extent the order of the first appellate authority. The computation of capital gains was remanded back to the Assessi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eriod specified therein. The limitation specified in clause (a) and (b) of Section 153B(1) commences from the end of the financial year in which the last of the authorisation for search or for requisition was executed. Reference is also made to sub-section (2) of Section 153(B), which deems such authorisation to be that recorded in the last panchnama drawn in relation to any person pursuant to a search conducted in his premises. Hence going by the limitation for finalisation commencing from the last panchnama drawn, the 6 year block period should also be determined from the assessment year in which the last panchnama was drawn, is the argument. 9. We are unable to accept the argument so raised by the appellant. Sections 153A and 153B deal with two different aspects of the very same proceedings. Section 153A is a provision for assessment in case of search and seizure. This enables the assessment or re-assessment of the total income of six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which search is conducted. In the present case, the search was conducted on the close of the assessment year 1999-2000 on 02.03.2005 and then on the openin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in the course of the search, or other post-search material or information available with the Assessing Officer 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 the seized material"". Therein no incriminating material was unearthed during the search and, hence, no additions could have been made to the assessment, was the finding. Therein the additions, which were deleted, were on account of additions made on deemed dividend, corresponding to additions made on protective basis in the hands of Companies in which the assessee was a shareholder. We are, however, convinced that the said proposition of law, to which we respectfully agree, cannot lead to a deletion of additions at the hands of the deceased assessee herein, represented by the appellant-legal heir. 13. We started the narration of facts with the rider of that being 'from the perspective of the assessee' since the facts herein are not so simple as to merely apply the principle of no incriminating evidence having been recover....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the ground of limitation with respect to assessment year 1999-2000 relating to the first transaction, which was occasioned in the financial year 1998-1999, is not sustainable. Even then, the assessee's contention is that the proceedings under Section 153A was illegal and not validly instituted for reason of there being no incriminzting material recovered on search. Even if there was no incriminating material seized on search, the Department was perfectly within its authority to proceed on the basis of the consent letters received. However, then the proceedings ought to have been taken under Section 147 read with Section 149 of the IT Act. 16. In this context, we have to examine the assessee's contention as to the Department having deliberately proceeded under Section 153A, to get over the difficulties in proceeding otherwise as permitted by the IT Act; and giving a "fresh life" to the proceedings initiated on the materials already available with them, by way of the Tax Evasion Petition. Section 147 provides for reopening of assessment for reason of escapement of income. The materials received along with the Tax Evasion Petition definitely speaks of escapement of income, w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d truly all materials necessary for assessment. The limitation of four years as provided in the proviso to Section 147 does not apply. The tax effect for the year is more than one lakh and by virtue of the sub-cluse (b) of Section 149 (1) proceedings can be taken for six years. 18. As far as the assessment year 1999-2000 is concerned, the limitation commences from 31.03.2000, as per Section 149. The notice under Section 153A was dated 06.01.2006, i.e: in the financial year 2005-2006. Hence, if it was a notice under Section 149, the same would have been sustainable since for the relevant assessment year, i.e., 1999-2000 the income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment, is far more than one lakh. The proceedings have been taken in the 6th year the last of the years in which the Department was entitled to initiate such proceedings under section 149, i.e, on 06-01-2006, in assessment year 2005-2006. The limitation comences from 31.03.2000. If that be so, there is no limitation with respect to the next assessment year also, being 2000-2001, which extends upto the year 2006-2007. We do not find any benefit having been derived by the Department insofar as initiating proceedings ....