TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (9) TMI 893
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion of delay in the form of an affidavit, which was sworn by the assessee. The contents of the affidavit read as under: "a) The impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) was received by me on 30.08.2019. I was to hand over the same to the concerned Tax Practitioner for filing an appeal against the same before Hon'ble However, inadvertently, I forgot to pass on such order to the said Tax Practitioner. b) I say and submit that since I am not well read and I unable to comprehend the contents of the order, for which it took a reasonable time. Thereafter, due to mf advanced age, it took some time for me to gather records and consult practitioners of Chartered Accountancy and law? c) However, upon inquiry by the concerned Tax Practitioner eventually, I realized that the impugned order was not forwarded for filing an appeal before Your Honors. As soon as I, came across such facts, I immediately forwarded the impugned order to the concerned Tax Practitioner who, in turn, forwarded the same to the concerned Advocate with due diligence for filing of Appeal before Your Honors. Thereafter, I concerned advocate prepared Form No.36 and forwarded the same for signatu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g allegations against the said CA. Therefore, explanation given by the assessee is not plausible so as to get leniency from this Tribunal for condonation of delay in fling appeal before the Tribunal, and thus, appeals filed by the assessee are inadmissible. 6. We have duly considered rival contentions and gone through the record carefully. Sub-section 5 of Section 253 contemplates that the Tribunal may admit an appeal or permit filing of memorandum of cross-objections after expiry of relevant period, if it is satisfied that there was a sufficient cause for not presenting it within that period. Similarly, it has been used in section 5 of Indian Limitation Act, 1963. Whenever interpretation and construction of this expression has fallen for consideration before Hon'ble High Court as well as before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, then, Hon'ble Court were unanimous in their conclusion that this expression is to be used liberally. We may make reference to the following observations of the Hon'ble Supreme court from the decision in the case of Collector Land Acquisition Vs. Mst. Katiji & Others, 1987 AIR 1353: "1. Ordinarily a litigant does not stand to benefit by lodging an appea....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... are meant to see that parties do not resort to dilatory tactics but seek their remedy promptly. The idea is that every legal remedy must be kept alive for a legislatively fixed period of time. A court knows that refusal to condone delay would result foreclosing a suitor from putting forth his cause. There is no presumption that delay in approaching the court is always deliberate. This Court has held that the words "sufficient cause" under Section 5 of the Limitation Act should receive a liberal construction so as to advance substantial justice vide Shakuntala Devi lain Vs. Kuntal Kumari [AIR 1969 SC 575] and State of West Bengal Vs. The Administrator, Howrah Municipality [AIR 1972 SC 749]. It must be remembered that in every case of delay there can be some lapse on the part of the litigant concerned. That alone is not enough to turn down his plea and to shut the door against him. If the explanation does not smack of mala fides or it is not put forth as part of a dilatory strategy the court must show utmost consideration to the suitor. But when there is reasonable ground to think that the delay was occasioned by the party deliberately to gain time then the court should lean against....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....for adjudication, because it does not call for discovery of any new evidence/facts which are required to be brought on record. 12. The grounds of appeal taken by the assessee are not in consonance with the Rule 8 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 - they are descriptive and argumentative in nature. In brief the grievance of the assessee is that the ld.CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 4,48,378/- which was added by the AO on account of unexplained deposits in the bank account, and addition of Rs. 5,13,883/- which was added by the AO on account of unexplained investment in purchase of the property. 13. Brief facts of the case are that search under section 132 of the Income Tax Act was carried out in group cases of Thakore group on 21.9.2010. The residence of the assessee was also covered by the search and in order to give logical end to the proceedings, a notice under section 153A was issued and served upon the assessee on 18.10.2011. In response to the notice, the assessee submitted a letter dated 17.11.2011 stating that PAN mentioned in the notice was incorrect. Further, the assessee requested to provide copies of statement recorded during the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....me unless any incriminating material demonstrating escapement of income was found during the course of search. On the other hand, the ld.DR relied on the order of the AO. 16. We have duly considered rival contentions and gone through the record carefully. Before adverting to the facts and alleged seized material considered by the ld.AO for making the addition in the hands of the assessee, we deem it appropriate to bear in mind the position of law propounded in various authoritative judgments recording scope of section 153A of the Act. We are of the view that in this regard, there were large numbers of decisions. First we refer to the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kabul Chawla, 380 ITR 573 (Del). Hon'ble Delhi High Court after detailed analysis has summarized the following legal position: 37. On a conspectus of Section 153A(1) of the Act, read with the provisos thereto, and in the light of the law explained in the aforementioned decisions, the legal position that emerges is as under: i. Once a search takes place under Section 132 of the Act, notice under Section 153 A(1) will have to be mandatorily issued to the person searched requ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Mahajan and others, rendered in ITA No.5585/Del/2015 (copy of the decision placed on record) has considered this aspect in its decision. Thereafter, the Tribunal has specifically held that serial no.(iv) of the above proposition, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court has specifically held that assessment under section 153A of the Act has to be specifically made on the basis of seized material. ITAT Delhi Bench was considering an aspect whether the evidence in the shape of books of accounts, money, bullion, jewellery found during the course of search relates to other person than the searched person, can that be considered while making assessment under section 153A of the Act. Like in the present appeals, simultaneous search was carried out at the premises of the Venus Infrastructure and Ashok Sunderdas Vaswani, and the material found during the search of Venus Infrastructure Developers or Ashok Sunderdas Vaswani could be used while framing the assessment of Rajesh Sunderdas Vaswani and Deepak Budharmal Vaswani under section 153A of the Act. ITAT Delhi Bench has specifically held that material recovered from the premises of other person cannot be used in the hands of the searched person. For ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... question was posed to the learned counsel for the Revenue whether in the present case anything incriminating has been found when the premises of the Assessee was searched. The answer was in the negative. The entire case against the Assessee was based on what was found during the search of the premises of the AEZ Group. It is thus apparent on the face of it, that the notice to the Assessee under Section 153A of the Act was misconceived since the so-called incriminating material was not found during the search of the Assessee's premises. The Revenue could have proceeded against the Assessee on the basis of the documents discovered under any other provision of law, but certainly, not under Section 153A. This goes to the root of the matter." 21. Hon'ble Court has specifically observed for the purpose of section 153A that only seized material is required. However, if there is any other incriminating material belong to the assessee found at the premises of the some other person, then the assessment has to be made under other provisions and not under section 153A of the Act. Hon'ble jurisdictional high Court has also considered the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....se where there is a search or requisition, the Assessing Officer is obliged to issue notice to such person to furnish returns of income for the six years preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which the search is conducted or requisition is made, any addition or disallowance can be made only on the basis of material collected during the search or requisition. In case no incriminating material is found, as held by the Rajasthan High Court in the case of Jai Steel (India) (supra), the earlier assessment would have to be reiterated. In case where pending assessments have abated, the Assessing Officer can pass assessment orders for each of the six years determining the total income of the assessee which would include income declared in the returns, if any, furnished by the assessee as well as undisclosed income, if any, unearthed during the search or requisition. In case where a pending reassessment under section 147 of the Act has abated, needless to state that the scope and ambit of the assessment would include any order which the Assessing Officer could have passed under section 147 of the Act as well as under section 153A of the Act. 17. In the fact....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... been framed earlier and no assessment or reassessment was pending on the date of initiation of search under section 132 or making of requisition under section 132A, while computing the total income of the assessee under section 153A of the Act, additions or disallowances can be made only on the basis of the incriminating material found during the search or requisition. In the present case, it is an admitted position that no incriminating material was found during the course of search, however, it is on the basis of some material collected by the Assessing Officer much subsequent to the search, that the impugned additions came to be made. 19. On behalf of the appellant, it has been contended that if any incriminating material is found, notwithstanding that in relation to the year under consideration, no incriminating material is found, it would be permissible to make additions and disallowance in respect of all the six assessment years. In the opinion of this court, the said contention does not merit acceptance, inasmuch as, the assessment in respect of each of the six assessment years is a separate and distinct assessment. Under section 153A of the Act, an assessment has ....