2018 (6) TMI 1380

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....leting the addition by holding that the jurisdiction u/s 153C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short] is not assumed properly. The Revenue is further aggrieved by the fact that the ld. CIT(A) allowed appeal of the assessee without going into the merits of the case. 3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that a search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Act was conducted on 22.03.2011 in the Amtek Group of cases. Documents belonging to the assessee were also found and seized from the premises. Accordingly, notice u/s 153C of the Act was issued to the assessee on 08.11.2012. Satisfaction note was supplied to the assessee on 26.10.2012. In response to the said notice, the assessee filed re....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n the seized documents as also clarified by the assessee. Therefore the total of the figures mentioned in the seized documents was actually came to Rs. 48,28,400/- against the total amount of Rs. 1,29,36,400/- shown in the seized documents which has already been added to the income of the assessee. Hence, no double addition is required to be made again on the basis of same seized documents. 4.4 In this case the assessment was already completed u/s 153C of the I.T.Act,1961 at the income of Rs. 79,42,030/- on 31-12-2010 against the original returned income of Rs. NIL by the DCIT Centre Circle-18 New Delhi by making following additions-.- a) Rs. 48,28,400/- under section 69 of the IT Act, 1961 on account of cash payments made....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ase of Manish Maheshwari 289 ITR 341, the ld. CIT(A) was convinced that Assessing Officer has not properly assumed jurisdiction u/s 153C of the Act and accordingly quashed the assessment order so framed. Since the ld. CIT(A) has quashed the assessment on assumption of wrong jurisdiction, he did not think it fit to go into the merits of the case. Aggrieved by this, the Revenue is before us. 9. The ld. DR strongly relied upon the findings of the Assessing Officer. 10. Per contra, the ld. counsel for the assessee pointed out that the notice u/s 153C of the Act was issued to the assessee on 08.11.2012, therefore, the impugned assessment order is beyond the scope of provisions of section 153C of the Act. It is the say of the counsel that t....