TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (11) TMI 1392
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have upheld the order of the A.O. 4. It is, therefore, prayed that the order of the Ld. CIT (A) be set aside and that of the A.O. be restored to the above extent." 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in construction/organisation/development work. A search was conducted at the premises of various members of "Soham group" on 13-06-2013 in which certain incriminating loose papers were found and seized. Search was also carried out on "Sarkar group" on 12-07-2013 and simultaneously survey action under section 133A of the Act was also carried out at the business premises of "Sarkar group". During the course of search, evidences of cash transactions in respect of the land deals of around Rs. 22.8 crores entered into by M/s Pushkar Corporation was found. In one of the three land deals, the assessee was also party to the same. The allegation of the AO is that M/s Pushkar Corporation sold land admeasuring 2914 m² to the assessee by way of registered sale deed dated 03-11-2010 for sale consideration of 1.8 crores. However, as per the loose papers found during the c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s even the minutest detail of brokerage paid also. The assessee's books records only Rs 1.80 crore and hence, the remaining sum of Rs 5,17,00,000/- is added to the total income as unexplained investment in purchase of land. The brokerage expenditure is not allowed as the same has been paid out of unaccounted sources. Even otherwise the same is not an allowable expenditure u/s. 40A(3) as the same is cash expenditure exceeding Rs 20,000/-. 15. Accordingly, a sum of Rs. 5,17,00,000/- is added u/s 69 of the Act as the on money payment to Pushkar Corporation on purchase of land. Penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act are separately initiated for concealment of income." 4. In appeal before Ld. CIT(Appeals), the assessee contested the validity of notice issued under section 153C of the Act on the ground that for AO to assume jurisdiction to assess income under section 153C of the Act, the documents must "belong" to the assessee. The assessee submitted that the loose papers on the basis of which income has been added in the hands of the assessee do not "belong to" the assessee as they were neither seized from the assessee, nor they were written in the handwriting of the ass....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 'on money' to the vendors and no document containing signature of the appellant or hand writing of the appellant was found during the course of search. There was no mention of either name or address or both of the appellant in these documents. The searched persons did not confirm that the documents did not belong to them but belonged to the appellant. These documents are admittedly not in the handwriting of the appellant and do not bear his signature. In the circumstances, when the condition precedent for issue of notice is not fulfilled action taken under section 153C is not justified. 9.1 In view of the given facts and circumstances of the case the appellant cannot be said to be owner of the seized documents based on which the jurisdiction was acquired by the AO. The documents do not belong to the assessee. In terms of the ratio laid down by the jurisdictional High Court and the hon'ble Delhi High Court in the cases cited above, the requirements of section 153C, thus, have not been fulfilled in the present case. Therefore, after having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, in my considered opinion, the AO was not justified in acquiring jurisdiction ov....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 153C of the Act is a machinery provision which is inserted in the statute book for the purpose of carrying out assessments of a person other than the person searched under sections 132 and 132A of the Act. The moot question that arises for consideration in the present case is as to what is relevant date from which the amended provisions of section 153C of the Act would be applicable. While the amended provisions have been expressly brought into force with effect from 1.6.2015, the controversy in the present case arises because the searches in all these case had been conducted prior to 1.6.2015, whereas the proceedings under section 153C of the Act have been initiated after that date and it is in this backdrop that the validity of the impugned notices has been called in question. It is the case of the petitioners that the proceedings under section 153C of the Act are triggered by the search, and hence the provisions of law as existing on the date of the search have to be followed, while it is the case the respondents that the provisions of law as existing on the date of recording of satisfaction by the Assessing Officer of the person searched and the date of issuance of notice unde....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....terial belongs or belong to the other person. In the present case, the hard-disc containing in the information relating to the petitioners admittedly did not belong to them, therefore, as on the date of the search, the essential jurisdictional requirement to justify assumption of jurisdiction under section 153C of the Act in case of the petitioners, did not exist. It was only on 1st June, 2015 when the amended provisions came into force that the Assessing Officer of the searched person could have formed the requisite belief that the books of account or documents seized or requisitioned pertain to or the information contained therein relates to the petitioners. 6.1 In the case of Index Securities (P.) Ltd[2017] 86 taxmann.com 84 (Delhi), the Delhi High Court held that the essential jurisdictional requirement for assumption of jurisdiction under section 153C (prior to its amendment with effect from 1-6-2015) qua 'other person' is that seized documents forming basis of satisfaction note must not merely 'pertain' to other person but must belong to 'other person'. During course of assessment proceedings, in case of a company, a number of documents were found and seized which contained....