TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (7) TMI 558
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Act, dated 29.12.2019 for A.Y. 2015-16. The assessee has assailed the impugned order on the following grounds of appeal before us: "1. Ld. Pr. CIT erred in invoking the provisions of sec. 263 and in setting aside the assessment order for fresh enquiry. Order passed u/s. 263 is unsustainable and is passed without properly appreciating the facts and evidences. The assessment order is neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. 2. The appellant reserves the right to add, amend or modify any of the ground/s of appeal." 2. Controversy involved in the present appeal lies in a narrow compass, i.e. sustainability of the order passed by the Pr. CIT u/s. 263 of the Act dated 10.02.2022, wherein the order....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... conducting proper enquiries and affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 5. The assessee being aggrieved with the order of the Pr. CIT passed u/s. 263 of the Act dated 10.02.2022 has carried the matter in appeal before us. 6. We have heard the ld. authorized representatives of both the parties, perused the orders of the lower authorities and the material available on record, as well as considered the judicial pronouncements that have been pressed into service by them to drive home their respective contentions. 7. Admittedly, it is a matter of fact borne from record that the case of the assessee was initially reopened by the A.O u/s. 147 of the Act. Assessment was, thereafter, framed by the A.O vide his or....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n i.e. A.Y. 2015- 16 was found and seized in the course of the search proceedings conducted on the assessee. 9. On the basis of the aforesaid facts, we are of the considered view that now when no incriminating material was found and seized in the course of search and seizure proceedings conducted in the case of the assessee u/s. 132 of the Act for the year under consideration i.e. A.Y. 2015- 16, therefore, no addition as regards the unabated assessment for the said year could have been made by the A.O. Our aforesaid view is fortified by the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Abhisar Buildwell P. Ltd. [2023] 149 taxmann.com 399 (SC), wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court has held as under: ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r requisition under Section 132A of the Act, 1961. However, the completed/unabated assessments can be reopened by the AO in exercise of powers under Sections 147/148 of the Act, subject to fulfilment of the conditions as envisaged/mentioned under sections 147/148 of the Act and those powers are saved. The question involved in the present set of appeals and review petition is answered accordingly in terms of the above and the appeals and review petition preferred by the Revenue are hereby dismissed. No costs." 10. Considering the aforesaid facts involved in the case of the assessee r.w. the settled position of law which is no more res-integra as on date, i.e. no addition in absence of any incriminating material can be made in res....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....arly of the opinion that keeping in view the facts and circumstances of this case and, in particular, having regard to the fact that the Commissioner of Income Tax exercising its revisional jurisdiction reopened the order of assessment only in relation to lease equalization fund which being not the subject of the reassessment proceedings, the period of limitation provided for under Sub-section (2) of Section 263 of the Act would begin to run from the date of the order of assessment and not from the order of reassessment. The revisional jurisdiction having, thus, been invoked by the Commissioner of Income Tax beyond the period of limitation, it was wholly without jurisdiction rendering the entire proceeding a nullity." Considering the jud....