2021 (10) TMI 99

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....-09 to 2010-11. 2. All the three appeals have similar facts and issues, therefore have been taken into consideration simultaneously for adjudication by this composite order and we will quote facts of ITA No. 69/RPR/2019 and result of the same shall apply mutatis mutandis to the other appeals. 3. In the instant case, the Assessee has filed its return of income on dated 30/09/2012. Thereafter, a search and seizure operation was conducted u/sec. 132 of the Act in the case of Crest Topworth Group on dated 10/10/2012, which resulted into passing of assessment order dated 10/11/2016 u/sec. 153A r.w.s. 143 of the Act and total income was assessed at Rs. 4,93,82,49,811/-. Later on, the said assessment order was scrutinized by the Pr.CIT u/sec. 26....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....erial already on record. Further, that the action of the Ld. PCIT in invoking jurisdiction uls.263 by alleging that the Ld.AO failed to carry out necessary enquiries and investigation with regard to the issues specified therein is devoid of merit in as much as the impugned assessment pertains to unabated assessment of the appellant, which dehors incriminating seized material could not be revised by resorting to provisions of section 263 of the Act. Hence, it is prayed that the Order passed by the Ld. PCIT under the provisions of section 263 of the Act may please be cancelled." 5. The main grievance of the Assessee in this appeal is that no incriminating material or documents were unearthed and seized during the course of survey operatio....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....law that the completed assessments cannot be disturbed. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr.CIT Vs. Mahesh Kumar Gupta [2016 (12) TMI 684 (Del. HC)] has dealt with an identical issue and held as under:- "3. The ITAT concluded based upon the materials available that the search and seizure operations did not yield any fresh material warranting addition under section 153A of the Act, and therefore, could not clothe the CIT with the authority to add an amount on the basis of a fresh appraisal of the existing materials that formed part of the original assessment. It is urged by the Revenue that the CIT acted within his jurisdiction in concluding that the AO erroneously did not bring to tax the amount that had to be included unde....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ey which unlocks the treasury" of the Revenue's jurisdiction in regard to matters that had attracted attention in the regular course of assessment." The Hon'ble High Court in the said case affirmed the view of the ITAT wherein it was held that survey and seizure operation did not yield any fresh material warranting addition under section 153A of the Act, and therefore, could not clothe the CIT with the authority to add an amount on the basis of a fresh appraisal of the existing materials that formed part of the original assessment. 7.2 The Hon‟ble Delhi High Court in the case titled as CCIT Vs. Kabul Chawla (ITA 707/2014, dated 28.08.2015), clearly held that if on the date of search, the assessment proceedings already stood com....