TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (3) TMI 40
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of the Act. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred, both on facts and in law, in confirming the action of the AO despite the fact that the assessment order passed under section 143(3) of the Act is null and void as the same has been passed in violation of CBDT Circular No. 19/2019 requiring mandatory DIN in the body of the assessment order. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in rejecting the contention of the assessee that the proceedings initiated under section 143(3) and the assessment order passed in consequence thereto are bad in law in the absence of any incriminating material belonging to the assessee being found during the search. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the proceedings initiated under Section 143(3) of the Act and the assessment framed under the said section is bad and liable to be quashed in the absence of any valid satisfaction being recorded by the assessing officer of the searched person as well as the assessing officer of the assessee. 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned AO has erred in issuing notice under sectio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....essee has made unexplained investment in cash in property and received interest on cash investment which were not disclosed by the assessee. Then proceedings u/s 153C were initiated in the case of assessee after recording satisfaction by the AO of the assessee on 10-10-2022 based on the satisfaction note dt. 03-08-2022 alonwith the material supplied by the AO of person searched. Consequently, notices u/s 153C dt. 31- 10-22 were served upon the assessee for A. Yrs. 2015-16 to 2020-21. For AY 2021-22, notice u/s 143(2) was issued on 30-06-2022.Thereafter a notice u/s 142(1) was issued on 13-10-2022 which was duly complied with by the assessee on 28-10-2022. After considering the replies from the assessee, assessment order was passed u/s 143(3) dt. 28.12.2022 by making addition of Rs 78,75,000/- towards undisclosed interest income. 4. In first appeal, ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee, thus the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 5. Before us, in support of the ground of appeal No. 2 taken by the assessee, ld. AR submitted that the assessing officer of the person searched i.e. Dy. CIT, Central Circle-31, New Delhi based on the documents seized from the premi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ja Varshney Vs. DCIT, CC-31, Delhi in ITA No. 1459/Del/2024 order dt. 26-09-24 - Tejinder Kaur Vs. ACIT CC-31, Delhi in ITA No. 936/Del/2024 order dt. 11-10-2024 - Akansha Gupta Vs. ACIT,CC-4 Delhi in ITA No. 3074/Del/2023 order dt. 10-07-2024 7. Ld. AR further submitted that in the case of Akansha Gupta (supra) the facts are identical as in that case also proceedings u/s 153C were initiated based on the documents found and seized during the course of search conducted in the case of Praveen Jain and others. The assessment was also done u/s 143(3) of for AY 2021-22 when the proceedings were initiated u/s 153C in AY 2022-23 based on the material supplied by the ld AO in case of person searched. Ld. AR thus submitted that in the instant case, for making the assessments u/s 153C of the Act, the period of six years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant for the previous year, in which search was conducted has to be reckoned from the date of receipt of the documents by the AO of the assessee which in the present case is 10-10-2022 and accordingly, assessment years relevant for the previous year in which search was conducted is AY 2023-24 and the six assessment years imme....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... The findings of the Tribunal in the case of Jasjit Singh (supra) in para-15 to para -20 is reproduced as under:- "15. We find that an identical issue has been decided by Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of DSL Properties P. Ltd. (supra) in favour of the assessee accepting the similar contention of the assessee. Similar view has been expressed by the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of V.K. Fiscal (supra) holding that the date of receiving of the seized documents would become the date of search and six years period would be reckoned from this date. For a ready reference para no. 19, 21, 22 & 23 of the decision of Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of DSL Properties (supra) are being reproduced hereunder: 19. "We have carefully considered the rival submissions. Proviso to section 153C reads as under: "Provided that in case of such other person, the reference to the date of initiation of the search u/s132 or making of requisition u/s 132A in the second proviso to [sub-section (1) off section 153A shall be construed as reference to the date of receiving the books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned by the AO having jurisdiction over such ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....itiating valid jurisdiction u/s 153C, even if the AO of the person searched and the AO of such other person is the same, he has to first record the satisfaction in the file of the person searched and thereafter, such note along with the seized document/books of account is to be placed in the file of such other person. The date on which this exercise is done would be considered as the date of receiving the books of account or document by the AO having jurisdiction over such other person. Though while examining the facts of the assessee's case we have arrived at the conclusion that no such exercise has been properly carried out and, therefore, initiation of proceedings u/s 153C itself is invalid, however, since both the parties have argued the issue of period of limitation also, we deem it proper to adjudicate the same. Since in this case satisfaction is recorded on 21st June, 2010 and notice u/s 153C is also issued on the same date, then only conclusion that can be drawn is that the AO of such other person has taken over the possession of seized document on 21st June, 2010.Accordingly, as per section 153(1), the AO can issue the notice for the previous year in which search is co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... person. Thereafter, the AO having jurisdiction over the other person has to proceed against him and issue notice to that person in order to assess or reassess the income of such other person in the manner contemplated by the provisions of section 153A.Now a question may arise as to the applicability of the second proviso to section 153A in the case of the other person, in order to examine the question of pending proceedings which have to abate. In the case of the searched person, the date with reference to which the proceedings for assessment or reassessment of any assessment year within the period of the six assessment years shall abate, is the date of initiation of the search u/s132 or the requisition u/s 132A. For instance, in the present case, with reference to the Puri Group of Companies, such date will be 5.1.2009.However, in the case of the other person, which in the present case is the petitioner herein, such date will be the date of receiving the books of account or documents or assets seized or requisition by the AO having jurisdiction over such other person. In the case of the other person, the question of pendency and abatement of the proceedings of assessment or reass....