TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (2) TMI 639
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....08)-Revenue's appeal: 1. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT (A) has erred in law and on facts in declaring the proceedings u/s 153A void ab initio without appreciating the facts that search action u/s 132 had actually been carried out in the premises belonging to assessee company and panchnama for that address was drawn as indicated in statement of facts attached to these grounds of appeal. 2. The assessee never challenged the issue of statutory notice u/s 153A(1)(a) of the I.T.Act, 1961 before the completion of assessment proceedings on the issue of panchnama/warrant of authorization u/s 132. Assessee never disputed in assessment proceedings or even during appeal proceedings that the re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... by incorrectly holding that no tangible evidence has been brought on record as indicated in the statement of fact. The assessee company has itself in a civil suit filed in a court of law admitted to have incurred said investment which has been accepted in a civil court. 7. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT (A) has erred in law and on facts in not appreciating the facts and material brought on records by the AO including the material seized during course of search. 8. That the order of the Ld. CIT (A) being erroneous in law and on facts which needs to be vacated and the order of the A.O. be restored. 9. That the appellant craves leave to add or amend any one or more of the grou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er section 132 was issued in name of assessee and no panchnama has been drawn which stands in name of assessee. He submitted that search under section 132 was initiated in business and residential premises of assessee on 21/10/10. Accordingly notice under section 153A was issued to assessee and was called upon to furnish return of income. In response to statutory notices, assessee filed its return of income which was followed by notice under section 143(2) of the Act. In response to statutory notices, representative of assessee from time to time appeared before Ld.AO and filed explanation. Based upon certain seized material, Ld. AO made addition in hands of assessee. 4. Aggrieved by addition made by Ld.AO assessee preferred appeal before....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eeded against under section 153 A. It is seen that : asessee has specifically questioned the validity of the proceedings under section 153A while filling the return in response to the notice under that section. In the remand AO has submitted that in fact, the jurisdiction under section 153A had been assumed under the provisions of section 153C. However, no evidence of the same has been furnished before the undersigned either in the form of satisfaction being recorded under section 153C or a copy of the notice where it could be seen that it had been issued under section 153C. In fact the satisfaction that the case has been taken up under section 153C is not found recorded anywhere in the assessment order either. It s quite clearly mentioned ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed to uphold order passed by Ld. CIT (A). 7.3. Accordingly Ground Nos. 1-4 raised by assessee on jurisdictional issue stands allowed. 8. As the assessment under section 153A(1)(b) has been quashed and set-aside, thereby additions deleted by Ld.CIT (A) becomes academic in nature. 9. In the result appeal filed by revenue for assessment year 2007-08 stands dismissed. 10. Assessment year 2011-12 Assessee has raised an additional ground for year under consideration as under: 1. That the assumption of jurisdiction to pass the assessment order u/s 143(3) dated 28-03-2013 vide notice u/s 143(2) dated 06-03-2013 is bad in law, more so when the first notice u/s 143(2) was not issued within the time period as per section 143(2) of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Traders Pvt. Ltd., reported in (2016) 383 ITR 448 and Pr.CIT & Anr. vs Silver Line & Anr. reported in (2016) 383 ITR 455 as well as Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of ACIT vs. Hotel blue Moon reported in (2010) 321 ITR 362, Ld.Counsel submitted that assessment order passed is illegal and bad in law. 12. On the contrary Ld.CIT,DR submitted that, in terms of section 292 BB of the Act assessee participated in assessment proceedings, without plea of limitation being raised before Ld. AO. Ld. CIT DR submitted that in present case notice under section 143(2) has been issued to assessee pursuant to returns filed by assessee in view of notice under section 142(1) after issuance of notice under section 132 the Act. He thus submitted that notice un....