TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (8) TMI 502
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....85, 13887, 13891, 13893, 13898, 13899, 13904, 13905, 14509, 14512, 14515, 14524, 14525, 14526, 14521, 14522, 14523, 14530, 14534, 14518, 14519 and 14520 of 2023 W.P.No.11630 of 2023:- HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C. SARAVANAN For the Appellant : Mr. A.S. Sriram, Mr. J.D. Mistri, Mr. R. Sivaraman, M/s. Vandana Vyas. Mr. R. Sivaraman, M/s. Hema Muralikrishnan and Mr. S. Ramamurthy For the Respondent : Mr. A.P. Srinivas Senior Standing Counsel and Mr. A. N. R. Jayaprathap, Junior Standing Counsel ORDER By this common order all these writ petitions are being disposed of. 2. In these writ petitions, the respective petitioners have challenged the respective impugned Assessment Orders passed under Section 153C read with Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and Scrutiny Assessment Orders passed under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. The details of the respective writ petitioners challenging the Impugned Orders are as under:- Table 1:- Sl. No W.P. Nos. Name of the Petitioners Date of the I.Os. AY Provision under which the impugned I.O. have been passed 1. 11630 of 2023 M/s. LKS Gold House Private Limited 31.03.2023 2016-....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 21. 13443 of 2023 Shri. G.R. Ananthapadmanabhan 31.03.2023 2021- 2022 153C r.w.s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 22. 13436 of 2023 Shri. G.R. Ananthapadmanabhan 31.03.2023 2018- 2019 153C r.w.s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 23. 13489 of 2023 Muthusamy Goundar Palaniappan 29.03.2023 2017- 2018 153C r.w.s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 24. 13494 of 2023 Muthusamy Goundar Palaniappan 29.03.2023 2018- 2019 153C r.w.s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 25. 13500 of 2023 Muthusamy Goundar Palaniappan 30.03.2023 2020- 2021 153C r.w.s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 26. 13504 of 2023 Muthusamy Goundar Palaniappan 29.03.2023 2019- 2020 153C r.w.s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 27. 13602 of 2023 M/s. Original Kerala Jewellers 31.03.2023 2017- 2018 153C r.w.s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 28. 13609 of 2023 M/s. Original Kerala Jewellers 31.03.2023 2018- 2019 153C r.w.s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 29. 13616 of 2023 M/s. Original Kerala Jewellers 31.03.2023 2019- 2020 153C....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ection 153C read with Section 143(3) of the Income tax Act.] 4. Respective scrutiny assessment orders passed under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 merely coincides with the proceedings initiated against these petitioners under Section 153C of the IT Act, 1961 for six years, immediately preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which the search was conducted at the premises of M/s Mohanlal Jewellers (P) Ltd, (hereinafter referred to as searched persons on 10.11.2020. 5. In W.P.No.13139 of 2023, Impugned Order dated 31.03.2023 was challenged for the Assessment Year 2015-2016 filed by M/s. GRT Jewellers (India) Pvt Limited. 6. As Assessment Year 2015-2016 does not fall within six years, immediately preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which the search was conducted at the premises of searched persons, it is delinked and dealt with separately from the rest of the above writ petitions. 7. These petitioners were issued with Notices under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on various dates for the Assessment Years between 2016-2017 and 2020-2021. Meanwhile, returns under Section 139 of the 2021- 2022 were filed by....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sh Khatri had provided him with a Red Sandisk Pen Drive along with a Lenovo laptop to access the "J Pack" and that he used to handover the Laptop and the pen drive to Mr. Suresh Khatri the Director of the "searched person" after making entries on a regular basis. 14. In his statement for the Financial Year 2020-2021, Mr. Rajendra Kothari also stated that the information was maintained in the sandisk pen drive inside a black laptop which was handed over to one Kishore Khatri through one Sarvan, also an employee of the "searched persons." 15. In the said statement, Mr. Rajendra Kothari, the Accountant had also stated that the pen drive contained account data of various persons for the Assessment Year 2016-2017 to 2019-2020 which included these petitioners. 16. Mr. Suresh Khatri, the Director of the "searched person" in his statement u/s 132(4) has confirmed the statement of Mr. Rajesh Kothari, the Accountant of the "searched person". 17. The challenge to the respective Assessment Orders passed by the Assessing Officers are primarily on the ground that the Assessing Officer(s) have failed to consider the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Super Malls (P) Ltd v CI....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the petitioner, i.e person other than the searched person referred to in section 153A; and ii. that the books of account or documents or assets so seized or requisitioned had a bearing on the determination of total income of the petitioner's viz a 'other person' for the relevant assessment year or years referred to in section 153C(1). 23. All these Petitioners uniformly state that they had no unexplained transactions with the "search person" during these assessment. It is further submitted that the names in the JPACK does not match with initials and code names of these petitioners and thus the proceedings initiated based on the statements of Mr. Rajesh Kothari , the accountant and the Mr. Suresh Khatri of the "searched person" are liable to be interfered. 24. It is submitted that there was a jurisdictional error in assuming the power under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961. It is submitted that the 'satisfaction note' could not record any satisfaction to initiate proceeding against these petitioners. 25. It is submitted that the word 'satisfaction' refers to a conclusion drawn or a finding recorded on the material available and the satisfaction should refle....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hed person" in most of the cases are one and the same. Therefore, the question of handing over of the searched material did not arise and hence the time limit for completing the assessment expired on 31.03.2022, being 12 months from the end of the financial year in which the last of the authorization for search under section 132 or for requisition under section 132A was executed. It is therefore submitted that the second limb of 3rd proviso to Section 153B(1) did not apply as the search was by the same jurisdictional Assessing officer. 32. The cases of the respective Petitioner company along with their Directors and Partnership Firms along and their Partners have been discussed together and disposed in separate part of this order. 33. As mentioned above, the challenge to Scrutiny Assessment Orders respective Assessment Year 2021-2022 is dealt with separately in separate part of this order. Before dealing further, I shall briefly give the outlines of the cases of each of the petitioners and the relevant timelines. M/S. KLP PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED AND ITS DIRECTORS. 34. The Petitioners M/s. KLP Projects Private Ltd who are engaged in the construction and development of p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d u/s 156 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. - Notice u/s 274 r/w Section 271AAC(1) of the Act. 36. The Petitioner Mr. Maneesh Parmar, the Director of M/s. KLP Projects Private has challenged the following assessment order all dated 31.03.2023 in the following Writ Petitions:- S. No. W.P. No. AY Date of notice u/s 153C Date of the Assessment orders Assessed income u/s 143(3) r/w Section 153C (Taxable Income as per ROI + Unexplained Income under Section 69A of the Act) (Rs.) 1. 13114 of 2023 2017-2018 30.06.2022 31.12.2023 32,10,000 + 24,58,85,213 = 24,90,95,213 2. 13117 of 2023 2018-2019 30.06.2022 31.03.2023 1,97,56,360 + 1,03,81,95,500 = 1,05,79,51,860 3. 13119 of 2023 2019-2020 30.06.2022 31.03.2023 2,31,11,590 + 12,38,78,295 = 14,69, 89,885 4. 13125 of 2023 2020-2021 30.06.2022 31.03.2023 1,38,65,250 + 65,88,750 = 2,04,54,000 5. 13129 of 2023 2021-2022 - 31.03.2023 2,81,57,150 + 9,25,000 = 2,90, 82, 150 37. The timeline relevant to the case of the petitioner are as follows:- DATES EVENT 30.06.2022 Notice u/s 153C was issued to the Petitioner for the A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....3.2023 Petitioner filed their Return of Income for the above notice. (NA to WP No: 12021 of AY 21-22) 13.03.2023 • Notice u/s 143(2) was issued to the Petitioner to furnish details and documentary evidence with respect to the transactions made with M/s Mohanlal Jewellers (P)Ltd. (NA to W.P. No: 12021 of AY 21-22) • Notice u/s 142(1) was issued to the Petitioner. 17.03.2023 Petitioner sent a letter seeking the following information: • Name of the searched person and the date of warrant for such search. • Copies of the material seized. • Satisfaction record of the Assessing Officer of the searched person and the date of communication of the satisfaction note to the petitioner's assessing officer. • Satisfaction note recorded by the petitioner's authority. • Date of the seized material handed over by the searched person. 20.03.2023 Petitioner furnished the required details as per the notice issued on 13.03.2023. 22.03.2023 The Respondent in response to the request of the Petitioner provided only the satisfaction note and the seized ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Notice u/s 142(1) was issued by the Respondent seeking details as per the annexure. 08.03.2022 Petitioner filed their response in the web portal. 27.06.2022 Notice u/s 143(2) was issued seeking personal appearance of the writ petitioner on 12.07.2022. 29.11.2022 Notice u/s 142(1) was issued referring to the sworn statement and the details obtained from the searched person as per Section 153A. 05.12.2022 Petitioner filed their response objecting to the inferences made in the sworn statements and the seized material. 09.01.2023 Notice u/s 142(1) was issued seeking details as per the annexure. 12.01.2023 The Petitioner filed their response with the details as requested by the Petitioner. 18.01.2023 A letter was issued to intimate the Petitioner regarding the jurisdiction of the Writ petition was transferred from the First respondent to the Second Respondent. 09.03.2023 A show cause notice was issued by the Second Respondent for W.P. No: 11633, 11636, 11638 of 2023. 19.03.2023 A Show cause notice was issued by the Second Respondent. 20.03.2023 Petitioner filed their response to the show cause notice by raising objections. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....iled u/s 139 of the Act. 03.03.2022 Notice u/s 142(1) was issued seeking details of those mentioned in the annexure. 08.03.2022 Show cause notice issued by the R1. Filed the Return of Income on the web portal as per the notice issued u/s 142(1). 13.12.2022 Notice u/s 142(1) of the Act was issued by referring to the statement and details obtained from the searched person in terms of Section 153A. 19.12.2022 Response to the notice issued u/s 142(1) of the Act was filed by the petitioner and objected to the inference made on the analysis of the sworn statement and seized material as referred by the R1. 24.01.2023 Petitioner received a notice intimating the change of the incumbent in the office of the First Respondent and in view of the provisions of S. 129 of the Act. 25.01.2023 Response was filed by the Petitioner with respect to the notice issued on 24.01.2023. 24.02.2023 Notice u/s 143(2) was issued by the First Respondent. The Petitioner filed his response seeking copies of the sworn statement while filing objections with respect to the materials shared with the Writ Petitioner. 08.03.2023 The First Respondent sent copies of th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....22 Reply to the notice issued on 13.12.2022 was filed by the Petitioner containing objections to the inference on the sworn statements 24.01. 2023 Petitioner received a notice intimating the change of the incumbent in the office of the First Respondent and in view of the provisions of S. 129 of the Act. 08.03.2023 A Show cause notice was issued enclosing copies of the satisfaction note to the Petitioner. 29.03.2023 The Impugned order was passed. GRT JEWELLERS (INDIA) PVT LTD 46. The Petitioners GRT Jewellers (India) Pvt Ltd has challenged the following assessment order all dated 31.03.2023 in the following Writ Petitions:- S. No. W.P. No. AYs. Date of notice u/s 153C. Date of the Assessment orders. Assessed income u/s 143(3) r/w Section 153C (Taxable Income as per ROI + Unexplained Income under Section 69A of the Act) (Rs.) 1. 13139 of 2023 2015-16 20.03.2022 31.03.2023 20,01,60,79,730 2. 13142 of 2023 2017-18 20.03.2022 31.03.2023 18,39,04,306 3. 14379 of 2023 2018-19 20.03.2022 31.03.2023 2,57,48,79,776 4. 14384 of 2023 2019-20 20.03.2022 31.03.2023 6,31,5....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 153C read with section 143(3) for AY 2017-18 to 2021-22 G R ANANTHAPADMANABHAN 48. The Petitioner G.R. Ananthapadmanabhan, being a proprietor of GRT Jewellers (India) Pvt Ltd challenged the following assessment order all dated 31.03.2023 in the following Writ Petitions:- S. No. W.P. No. AYs. Date of notice u/s 153C. Date of the Assessment orders. Assessed income u/s 143(3) r/w Section 153C (Taxable Income as per ROI + Unexplained Income under Section 69A of the Act) (Rs.) 1. 13432 of 2023 2017-2018 22.03.2023 31.03.2023 18,54,37,370 + 20,18,13,530+ 10,20,33,400 = 48,92,84,300 2. 13436 of 2023 2018-2019 22.03.2023 31.03.2023 24,39,18,060 + 9,90,75,440 + 0 = 34, 29,93,500 3. 13438 of 2023 2019-2020 22.03.2023 31.03.2023 23,49,54,420 + 5,83,77,863 + 0 = 29,33,32,283 4. 13442 of 2023 2020-2021 22.03.2023 31.03.2023 14,09,88,100 + 3,67,35,874 + 0 = 17,77,23,974 5. 13443 of 2023 2021-2022 22.03.2023 31.03.2023 17,74,50,520 + 4,10,74,917+ 0 = 21,85,25,437 49. The timeline relevant to the case of the petitioner are as follows:- DATE EVENT 22.03.2023 Notice u/s 1....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., engaged in the business of jewellery retail has challenged the following assessment order all dated 31.03.2023 in the following Writ Petitions:- S. No. W.P. No. AY. Date of notice u/s 153C. Date of the Assessment orders. Assessed income u/s 143(3) r/w Section 153C (Taxable Income as per ROI + Unexplained Income under Section 69A of the Act) (Rs.) 1. 13602 of 2023 2017-18 09.01.2023 31.03.2023 2,20,99,491 + 62,51,327 = 2,83,50,818 2. 13609 of 2023 2018-19 09.01.2023 31.03.2023 7,42,28,920 + 25,39,525 = 7,67,68,505 3. 13616 of 2023 2019-20 09.01.2023 31.03.2023 2,44,41,091 + 40,01,095 = 2,84,42,186 4. 13619 of 2023 2020-21 09.01.2023 31.03.2023 50,55,400 + 52,30,266 = 1,02,85,866 5. 13625 of 2023 2021-22 09.01.2023 31.03.2023 23,80,630 + 19,38,517 = 43,19,147 53. The timeline relevant to the case of the petitioner are as follows:- DATE EVENT 15.07.2021 Demand Notice u/s 156 of the Income-tax Act was issued to the Petitioner by The Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax. 01.11.2017 The Petitioner filed the Return of Income for t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ht for 15 days' time to file the documents. 23.04.2022 The Petitioner submitted a the relevant documents and information to the notice issued u/s 142(1). 23.06.2022 Notice u/s 143(2) was issued to the Petitioner to directly appear and clarify certain points with respect to the Return of Income. 18.11. 2022 Notice u/s 142(1) was issued to produce documents and information as specified on or before 25.11.2022. 17.02.2023 The Petitioner received a notice of change of incumbent u/s 129 of the Act. The notice also contained an opportunity of personal hearing and was directed to make all their submissions on or before 23.02.2023. 23.02.2023 Petitioner resubmitted the documents. 05.03. 2023 A Show cause notice was issued u/s 153C by the respondent. 11.03.2023 - The Respondent issued a corrigendum to the show cause notice dated 05.03.2023 where it substituted the words "AmarT" as "PKM Karur". - The Respondent rejected the request for extension of time to submit their reply by 25.03.2023 and stated that the time limit to complete the assessment was by 31.03.2023. - The Petitioner was directed to furnish their reply on or before 15.03.202....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ommission, 2014 (2) AKR 529, M Suresh v Mahadevamma, 2021 (2) AKR 329, Vysya Bank v. DCWT (2008) 299 ITR 335 and Keshavlal Jethalal Shah v. Mohanlal Bhawandas, AIR 1968 SC 1336. 60. It is further submitted that the procedure under Section 65B of The Evidence Act, 1872 was not followed. It is submitted that it is a mandatory requirement for the admissibility of evidence of a computer printout and therefore it cannot be relied upon. The Petitioner has relied upon Vetrivel Madras v ACIT (2021) 437 ITR 178 (Mad) wherein it was held that when the assessments framed on the basis of the electronic records which were copies of excel sheet, excel work note book, failing to comply with Section 65B of The Evidence Act, 1872 was inadmissible in the eyes of law and rendered the document inadmissible piece in the eyes of the law. 61. The above petitioners have challenged the impugned assessment orders dated on 29.03.2023, 30.03.2023 and 31.03.2023 as mentioned above. It is submitted that the limitation for completing the assessment have expired on 31.03.2022 starting from 01.04.2021 and ending on 31.03.2022. 62. It is submitted that as far as the petitioner is concerned, the Assessing O....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....stance by means of letters, figures or marks, or by more than one of those means, intended to be used, or which may be used, for the purpose of recording that matter. 69. Section 65A of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 and Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 as special provisions relating to electronic record. 70. Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 reads as under:- "65B. Admissibility of electronic records. -- (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, any information contained in an electronic record which is printed on a paper, stored, recorded or copied in optical or magnetic media produced by a computer (hereinafter referred to as the computer output) shall be deemed to be also a document, if the conditions mentioned in this section are satisfied in relation to the information and computer in question and shall be admissible in any proceedings, without further proof or production of the original, as evidence or any contents of the original or of any fact stated therein of which direct evidence would be admissible. (2) The conditions referred to in sub-section (1) in respect of a computer output shall be the following, namely:- ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... showing that the electronic record was produced by a computer; c) dealing with any of the matters to which the conditions mentioned in sub-section (2) relate, and purporting to be signed by a person occupying a responsible official position in relation to the operation of the relevant device or the management of the relevant activities (whichever is appropriate) shall be evidence of any matter stated in the certificate; and for the purposes of this sub- section it shall be sufficient for a matter to be stated to the best of the knowledge and belief of the person stating it. (5) For the purposes of this section, - a) information shall be taken to be supplied to a computer if it is supplied thereto in any appropriate form and whether it is so supplied directly or (with or without human intervention) by means of any appropriate equipment; b) whether in the course of activities carried on by any official, information is supplied with a view to its being stored or processed for the purposes of those activities by a computer operated otherwise than in the course of those activities, that information, if duly supplied to that computer, shall be taken t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ith criminal proceedings before the Court. 75. The Assessment proceedings under the Income Tax Act, 1961 before an Assessing Officer is not a judicial proceeding. It is a Quasi judicial proceeding before a Quasi judicial officer. Therefore, the provisions of The Evidence Act, 1872 particularly special provisions relating to evidence relating to Section 65A, Section 65B and Section 66 are not relevant. 76. The decision of this court in the case of Vetrivel Madras Vs. ACIT, (2021) 437 ITR 178 (Mad) fails to note that Section 65B cannot be invoked in a quasi-judicial proceedings as the assessing officers are not governed by strict rules of evidence. Therefore, I am unable to follow the view of the Court in Vetrivel Madras Vs. ACIT, (2021) 437 ITR 178 (Mad). 77. The definition of "Books and Books of Accounts" in Section 2(12A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, at the time when the search was conducted at the premises of the "searched person" under section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 10.11.2020, i.e., before amendment and after amendment to Section 2 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the Finance Act, 2022 with effect from 01.04.2022 read as under:- Before 01.04.2022 amendment....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n the search was completed on 10.11.2020 not only print outs of data stored in a floppy disk, tape, pen drive or any other form of electro-magnetic data storage device was included in the definition of "Books and Books of Accounts" also other forms of storage implying that the informations stored in such form of electro-magnetic data search devicse such as san disk, hard disk etc., already quantified as "Books and Books of Accounts". 82. The amended definition includes books of accounts in electronic form or in digital form or scanned copies of data or printouts of data stored in digital or electronic form. 83. Therefore, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that there was a jurisdictional error in invoking Section 153C cannot be accepted and is rejected. 84. The submissions of the learned counsel for the Petitioner, Muthuswamy Gounder Palaniappan that there was illegality and invalidity all through cannot be countenanced as there is no illegality or invalidity in the proceedings initiated under Section 153C as per the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioners have to work out their remedy before the Appellate Authority if it is held that the Impugned A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....06.2022 13781 of 2023 2021-2022 - Maneesh Parmar 13775 of 2023 2020-2021 30.06.2022 30.06.2022 30.06.2022 13117 of 2023 2018-2019 30.06.2022 13119 of 2023 2019-2020 30.06.2022 13125 of 2023 2020-2021 30.06.2022 13129 of 2023 2021-2022 - Sunil Khetpalia 16431 of 2023 2019-2020 30.06.2022 30.06.2022 30.06.2022 12018 of 2023 2020-2021 30.06.2022 12021 of 2023 2021-2022 - Original Kerala Jewellers 13602 of 2023 2017-2018 09.01.2023 Details not available 09.01.2023 13609 of 2023 2018-2019 09.01.2023 13616 of 2023 2019-2020 09.01.2023 13619 of 2023 2020-2021 09.01.2023 13625 of 2023 2021-2022 09.01.2023 86. In Principal Commissioner of Income-tax, Central -3 v. Abhisar Buildwell (P) Ltd, [2023] 454 ITR 212 (SC), it was held as follows:- i. that in case of search under section 132 or requisi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ax Act 1961 was similar to and pari materia to Section 158BD of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 89. Therefore, the time limit for completing Assessment proceedings and passing the Assessment order will be one year from the date on which the documents were handed over or deemed to have been handed over to the "Assessing Officer" of the "other person" such as these petitioners, i.e. 31.03.2024. Therefore, the Writ Petition challenging the Assessment Orders passed under Section 153C read with Section 143(3) of the IT Act, 1961 are liable to be dismissed. 90. The above periods are relevant only for preparation and issuance of the "satisfaction note" under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961. They are not relevant for the purposes of computation of limitation for completing the assessment under Section 153C read with Section 143(3), Income Tax Act, 1961. 91. In Super Malls (P) Ltd v CIT, (2020) 4 SCC 581, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under:- "........In case, where the Assessing Officer of the searched person and the other person is the same, there can be one satisfaction note prepared by the Assessing Officer, as he himself is the Assessing Officer of the searched....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 100. As per 3rd proviso to section 153B(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the period of limitation for completing the assessment or re-assessment in case of the "other person" is the later of the three dates, namely :- i. twelve months from the end of the financial year in which the last of the authorisations for search under Section 132 was made; or ii. twelve months from the end of the financial year in which the last of the authorisations for requisition under Section 132-A was executed; or iii. twelve months from the end of the financial year in which books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned were handed over under Section 153-C to the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction over such other person, whichever is later. 101. It is only during the course of the assessment proceedings, of the "searched person" the Assessing Officer of the "searched person" will be in a position to establish the transaction which provides a link between the "other person with the "searched person" with their former PAN. It is only thereafter, the "satisfaction note(s)" can be prepared to persuade the "Assessing Officer" of the "other person" to initi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rson" ipso facto would not mean that the moment the documents were seized either by the investigating team and handed over to the assessing officer for completing the assessment under section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the limitation for completing the assessment in the case of "other person" would start running under 3rd proviso to section 153B (1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 108. Therefore, even if, the assessing officer of the "searched person" and the "other person" were one and the same, the only requirement is that a single satisfaction note in the capacity as the assessing officer of the "searched person" is sufficient. 109. Therefore, there is no merits in the arguments advanced on behalf of the respective petitioners that the assessment orders ought to have been passed on or before 31.03.2022. The submissions of the learned counsel for the respective petitioners are fallacious and are liable to be rejected. SECTION 143(3):- 110. As far as the impugned orders passed under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are concerned, they are regular assessment proceedings which have commenced after the issuance of Section 153C notice to the respective petiti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....merits of the case. Validly initiated proceedings for completing the assessment therefore, cannot abate. The respective Assessing Officer have passed Assessment Orders within the time stipulated under Section 153 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 112. Merely because these assessment orders were passed on the same date as on the dates when orders passed under Section 153C read with Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, would not mean that the Assessment Orders were without jurisdiction. Therefore, challenge to scrutiny of the above Assessment Order passed under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are without merits. Therefore, these Writ Petitions challenging the Assessment Orders passed under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are also liable to be dismissed. 113. In so far as unexplained income of the Mr. Maneesh Parmar and Mr. Sunil Khetpalia, is concerned there is an overlap as detailed above for W.P. 13119, 13125, 13129, 16431, 12018, 12021 of 2023. 114. From reading the tables, the amount of "unexplained income" for the Assessment year 2019-2020, 2020-2021 and 2021-2022 has been added to the accounts of both the directors of M/s.KLP Projects Private Li....