TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (4) TMI 633
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Surya Properties without appreciating the facts of the case in proper perspective. The Ld. CIT(A)-33 failed to appreciate the fact that no evidence direct or corroborative for the additional income was found, no cognizance of the assessment orders of other investors noted on that loose paper was taken and also no opportunity for cross examination of the searched party was extended. 3. The assessee is a Pvt. Ltd. Company engaged in the business of real estate."However, during the year under consideration, no such activity has been shown by the assessee. The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 14, New Delhi, vide his office letter no. ACIT/CC-14/2008-09/247 dated 23-09- 2008 has forwarded a Satisfaction Note wherein he has informed that a search and seizure operation was carried out at the residential premises of Sh. Narender Kumar of Surya Properties at 5/28, Chiranjiv Vihar, Ghaziabad on 22-09-2005. Documents marked as Annexure A-l to A-23 were seized during the search. He has also recorded in his satisfaction that Pages 35 to 56 of Annexure A-9 belong to this assessee i.e. M/s Shree Radhey Technologies Pvt. Ltd... Accordingly, the case of the Assessee Comp....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed for an amount of Rs. 1,22,50,000/- and accordingly held the same as undisclosed income of the assessee and added the same to the income of the assessee. 4. Being aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee field appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 5. The Ld. AR submitted that documents seized from the searched party must belong to the third party. In P. Srinivas Naik vs. ACIT CC (2), 117 ITD 201 (Bangalore), the ITAT has elaborately explained the meaning of 'belong to' 'belonging' implies something more than the idea of a casual association. It involves the notion of continuity and indicates one more or less intimate connection with the person over a period of time. The books of accounts or documents seized during the course of search had a close association with the group. It did not record the transaction carried out by the assessee. Under the W.T. Act, 1957 assets belonging to the assessee were taxable. The expression 'belonging to the assessee' connotes both the complete ownership and limited ownership and limited ownership of interest. Of course, belonging to is capable of connoting interest which is less than an abso....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g or books of accounts or documents during search at the premises of M/S Surya properties itself is bad in law. 6. The Ld. DR relied upon the order of the Assessing Officer and order of the CIT(A). The Ld. DR relied upon the decisions of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in cases of PCIT vs. Super Malls Pvt. Ltd. 393 ITR 557, PCIT vs. Nau Nidh Overseas Pvt. Ltd. 394 ITR 753 and Ganpati Fincap Services (P.) Ltd. vs. CIT 82 Taxmann.com 408 as well as PCIT vs. Sheetal International Pvt. Ltd. 2017-TIOL-1355-HC-DEL-IT) and PCIT vs. Instronics Ltd. 82 taxmann.com 257. 7. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. It is pertinenet to note that the documents which were seized by the Revenue at the premises of M/s Surya Properties in the said documents nowhere mentioned the said belongs to the assessee. The assessee at every stage of the Assessment Proceedings denied that the said document belongs to the assessee. In fact, the document which is heavily relied upon by the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A) has not at all having any title of the assessee or the signature of the assessee or signature of the employees of the assessee. This fact was never disputed by the Assessing Of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s under Section 153C of the Act, the seized documents had to be shown to belong to the other person and not merely pertaining to such other person. The change brought about in this regard in Section 153 C of the Act by way of amendment has been given prospective effect from 1st June 2015. The amended provision therefore has no application to the cases on hand. 8. The recent decision of the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune v. Sinhgad Technical Education Society [2017] 84 taxmann.com 290 (SC) settles the legal position in favour of the Assessees. The Supreme Court, while affirming the judgment of the Bombay High Court, approved the decision of the Gujarat High Court in Kamleshbhai Dharamshibhai Patel v. Commissioner of Income Tax-III, (2013) 263 CTR (Guj) 362 that a document seized 'should belong to a person other than the person referred to in Section 153A of the Act'. It has been categorically observed by the Supreme Court that the above position of law laid down by the Gujarat High Court is correct. 9. Consequently, this Court rejects the contention of the learned counsel for the Revenue that even prior to 1st June 2015 at the stage of initiation....