TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (9) TMI 1709
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short 'the Act'. Heard both the parties. Case file(s) perused. 2. It transpires at the outset that all the instant all four assessee's appeal(s) have arisen from search seizure operation carried out in the case of "M/s Sarojini" group on 06.03.2014. The department had also carried out a survey in assessee's case on 06.03.2014. All this culminated initiation sec. 153C proceedings against the assessee giving rise to various disallowance(s) / addition(s) to be dealt with in succeeding paragraphs. 3. Coming to former two assessment year(s) 2009-10 and 2010-11, learned authorized representative refers to the Assessing Officer's order-sheet forming part of the case records making it clear that he had pr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....impugned search go upto assessment year 2011-12 only. His case accordingly is that both the lower authorities have erred in facts as well as on law in assessing this taxpayer u/s 153C r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act in assessment year 2009-10 and 2010-11. 4. Learned CIT-DR strongly supported validity of the impugned assessment(s). He took us to 153B(2)(1) (first proviso) that the Assessing Officer has framed the impugned assessment in these former two assessment year(s) strictly as per law and therefore, the same are liable to be upheld. 5. We have given our thoughtful consideration to rival pleadings. Relevant case record(s) stand perused. There can hardly be any dispute that the assessee is not the searched person since proceeded u/s 153C of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... date of search brings us to August, 2016) are 2016-17, 2015-16, 2014-15, 2013-14 2012-13 assessment year 2011-12 and not beyond that. Hon'ble Delhi high court's twin decisions RRJ Securities Ltd and SSP Aviation Ltd. (supra) decide the very question in assessee's favour going by the very reasoning. We conclude in these facts that the impugned assessments in assessment years 2009-10 and 2010-11 not sustainable in law. The same stand quashed. The assessee's other pleadings on merits are rendered infructuous. Its former two appeals IT(SS)A 06 & 07/Kol/2018 are allowed. 6. Next come the latter two assessment year(s) 2011-12 and 2013-14 involving IT(SS)A No.08 & 09/Kol/2018. The assessee's only grievance in these two appeal(s) is that both....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l) and PCIT vs. Dipak Jashvantal Panchal (2017) 397 ITR 153(Guj) decide the instant legal issue in assessee's favour and against the Revenue that search assessment(s) have to be based on incriminating material found or seized during the course of search. Their lordship of hon'ble Delhi high court have further summarized the legal provision as under:- "37. On a conspectus of Section 153A(1) of the Act, read with the proviso thereto, and in the light of the law explained n 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 153A(1) will have to be mandatorily issued to the person searched requiring him to file returns for six AYs im....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....roceedings. vi. Insofar as pending assessments are concerned, the jurisdiction to make the original assessment and the assessment under Section 153A merges into one. Only one assessment shall be made separately for each AY on the basis of the findings of the search and any other material existing or brought on the record of the AO. vii. Completed assessments can be interfered with by the AO while making the assessment under Section 153A only on the basis of some incriminating material unearthed during the course of search or requisition of documents or undisclosed income or property discovered in the course of search which were not produced or not already disclosed or made known in the course of original assessment." We observe in t....