TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (7) TMI 638
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s appeal pertaining to same assessee were heard together and are disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity. ITA No. 3099/DEL/2013 [A.Y. 2005-06] 3. The ld. counsel for the assessee sought permission to withdraw the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No. 3099/DEL/2013 vide application dated NIL. Therefore, the same is dismissed as withdrawn. ITA No. 3095/DEL/2013 [A.Y. 2004-05] [Assessee's appeal] 4. The sum and substance of the grievance of the assessee is that notice issued u/s 153C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [the Act, for short] is illegal and without jurisdiction. 5. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that original return of income was filed by the assessee on 31.08.2005 declaring an income o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o the previous year in which search is conducted or requisition is made, begins from AY 2005-06. The ld AR vehemently argued that the impugned A.Y 2004-05 is therefore, out of the block of six assessment years for which assessment could be made. It was submitted that as the satisfaction u/s 153C of the Act was recorded on 23.11.2010, the last of the six A.Ys for which the Assessing Officer can assume jurisdiction is AY 2005-06. The impugned A.Y is 2004-05 and is, therefore, out of block of six assessment years and therefore the Assessing Officer cannot assume jurisdiction for making assessment. 10. The ld. counsel for the assessee also strongly relied upon the latest decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ojjus Medicar....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hich the returns were to be filed by the third party (whose premises are not searched and in respect of whom the specific provision under Section 153-C was enacted. The revenue argued that the proviso [to Section 153(c)(l)] is confined in its application to the question of abatement. It is quite plausible that the AO seized of the materials....would take his own time to forward the papers and materials belonging to the third party, to the concerned AO. In that event if the date would virtually 'relate back' as is sought to be contended by the revenue,(to the date of seizure), the prejudice caused to the third party, who would be drawn into proceedings as it were unwittingly (and in many cases have no concern with it at all), is disproportio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that the block periods would have to be reckoned with reference to the date of search can neither be countenanced nor accepted. The reckoning of the six AYs' would require one to firstly identify the FY in which the search was undertaken and which would lead to the ascertainment of the AY relevant to the previous year of search. The block of six AYs' would consequently be those which immediately precede the AY relevant to the year of search. In the case of a search assessment undertaken in terms of Section 153C, the solitary distinction would be that the previous year of search would stand substituted by the date or the year in which the books of accounts or documents and assets seized are handed over to the jurisdictional AO as opposed to....