TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (3) TMI 1214
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2 of the Act in the case of Shri R.K. Kedia group and its group concerns, residential/factory premises of partners, directors and proprietors of the group on 13.06.2014. During the course of search certain documents pertaining to Ms. Esha Kedia were found and seized from the premises of Sh. Raj Kumar Kedia which were handed over to the Assessing Officer of the assessee. The AO of the assessee after recording the satisfaction note on 10.11.2016 issued notice u/s 153C r.w.s. 153A of the Act in the case of the assessee for Asst. Years 2009-10 to 2014-15 and after verification of the return and replies filed by the assessee from the time to time the assessment was completed u/s 153C r.w.s. 153 of the Act on 26.05.2017 wherein addition of Rs. 15,25,264/- was made by holding the long term capital gain declared by the assesse as bogus and further 6% of such gain is added as commission expenses. 4. In first appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) vide impugned order dismissed the appeal of the assessee both on legal as well as on merits. Thus, the present appeal is preferred before the Tribunal. 5. The assessee has taken following grounds of appeal: "1. On the facts and circumstances of the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed satisfaction note for A.Y. 2009-10 to A.Y. 2014-15 and no separate satisfaction for each year falling in block period of six yeas was recorded. Neither any separate approval u/s 153D for each year was taken in the case of the assessee. For this, he relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of DCIT vs. Sunil Kumar Sharma & Ors. [2024] (2) TMI 116 which was affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 20.08.2024 reported in [2024] (8) TMI 1086-Supreme Court. He further submitted that from the perusal of the assessment order it could be seen that no paper whatsoever found and seized as a result of search was referred by the Assessing Officer and the additions have been made on the basis of information supplied in the regular return filed by the assessee. This fact is evident from para 4.1 of page 2 of the assessment order wherein the Ld. AO himself has observed as under" "on perusal of computation of income and share transaction detail submitted by the assessee......". He further submitted that during the course of search, the documents seized was the copy of HDFC Bank book for the period from 1st March, 2009 to 31st March, 2015 whic....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....me the jurisdiction to assess or reassess the 'total income' taking into consideration the incriminating material unearthed during the search and the other material available with the AO including the income declared in the returns; and iv) in case no incriminating material is unearthed during the search, the AO cannot assess or reassess taking into consideration the other material in respect of completed assessments/unabated assessments. Meaning thereby, in respect of completed/unabated assessments, no addition can be made by the AO in absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search under Section 132 or requisition under Section 132A of the Act, 1961. However, the completed/unabated assessments can be re-opened by the AO in exercise of powers under Sections 147/148 of the Act, subject to fulfilment of the conditions as envisaged/mentioned under sections 147/148 of the Act and those powers are saved. The question involved in the present set of appeals and review petition is answered accordingly in terms of the above and the appeals and review petition preferred by the Revenue are hereby dismissed. No costs." 10. In view of the above, in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....could be initiated were A.Y.2011-12 to 2016-17. Thus, the assessment year in appeal i.e., AY 2015-16 is fallen in the block period and, therefore, any order could be passed was u/s 153C of the Act and not u/s 143(3) as has been done in the instant case. For this, he placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Jasgit Singh [2023] (10) TMI 572-(SC) and also by this Bench of Tribunal in case of Raja Varshney vs. DCIT in ITA No.1459/Del/2024 dated 26.09.2024 and also in case of in Akansha Gupta vs. ACIT in ITA No.3074/Del/2023 dated 04.02.2025. Ld. AR prayed that assessment order passed u/s 143(3) is without jurisdiction and deserves to be hold bad in law and be quashed. 17. On the other hand, the Ld. CIT-DR vehemently supported the order of the lower authorities and request for confirmation of the same. 18. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. Admittedly in the instant case, the satisfaction note based on the seized material pertaining to assessee supplied by the Assessing Officer of the personal searched to the AO of assessee, was recorded by the Assessing Officer on 10.11.2016, thereafter, th....