TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (7) TMI 1100
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ections. By recording the submission of the Ld. Assessee's Representative, C.O. No. 46/Del/2020, 49/Del/2020 and 47/Del/2020are dismissed as not pressed. 3. The Department in its Appeals, raised identical grounds, therefore, for the sake of convenience Grounds of Appeal in ITA No.938/Del/2020 are reproduced as under:- "1. The Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and on fact in ignoring that section 153A of Income Tax Act 1961 does not over-ride the provisions of Chapter-IV-E relating to Capital Gain and section 54F of the Income Tax Act 1961. 2. The Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and on fact in allowing relief u/s 54F of Income Tax Act 1961 by ignoring the finding of the Assessing Officer that there was no investment in purchase of property at 5, K. G. Marg, New Delhi as the assessee was residing in the same property in capacity of Director and shareholder in the companies owning this property before the agreement to sell and also after agreement when the assessee was partner in the LLPs converted from same companies. 3. The Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and on fact that the conversion of companies owning property at 5, K. G. Marg, New Delhi into LLPs was illegal for violation of provi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Ld. Assessee's Representative invoking the Rule 27 of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules 1963 ('Rule' for short), submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has not adjudicated the jurisdictional/legal ground and has not given any finding on the additional grounds of appeal of the Assessee raised before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. Counsel submitted that it is well settled law that, when the Ld. CIT(A) has not adjudicated the legal grounds of appeal of the Assessee and decided the Appeal in favour of the Assessee on some other grounds, in the Appeal filed by the Revenue, though the Assessee/respondent has not appealed, can support the order appealed against on any of the Grounds decided against him. The Ld. Assessee's Representative has relied on plethora of Judgments in support of the said contention. 7. The Ld. Counsel has also taken us through the seized documents mentioned in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and submitted that, those seized documents are not the basis for the disallowance made by the A.O. u/s 54F of the Act, therefore, submitted that the assumption of jurisdiction by the A.O. u/s 153A of the Act itself was erroneous and making the disallowance dehors the incriminating mate....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... by the appellant. 9.2.2 The appellant had raised the issue that there is no seized material relevant to this disclosed transaction of claim of exemption u/s 54F by the appellant and the assessment for this year was a completed year, therefore, the ratio of above cases is squarely applicable on the facts of this case. The appellant had explained during the hearing that the seized paper referred by the AO at page 17 of the assessment order belongs to period beyond the relevant AY and is otherwise also not relevant to the transaction under consideration. He further contended that the statement of Sh. Bhupinder Singh referred in the assessment order had nothing incriminating in relation to this transaction and apart from that there is no reference to any seized material in the whole assessment order. Therefore, it was vehemently argued that the disallowance made is without jurisdiction since it is not based on any incriminating material found as a result of search on the appellant, as has been also held by the judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Kabul Chawla reported in 380 ITR 573. The submissions of the appellant and points raised during the hearing ha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....curities Pvt. Ltd. for providing the facility of security guard to M/s V-John Industries (correct name is VIjohn Healthcare India LLP which is engaged in manufacture of chemicals & chemical products), a concerned belonging to Kochar family). 12. The above observation of the A.O. makes it clear the incriminating document seized during the search relates to the subsequent period of acquisition of the property. The Ld. CIT(A) has also given its finding in respect of seized document said fact has been found by the Ld. CIT(A) in its order at para 8.3.2.1 at Page No. 77 &78. "It is observed that this seized paper relate to the bill of security charges paid for the month of September, 2016. The appellant became owner of this property on 01.04.2016 and this paper relates to the later period of the year. As per the details submitted by the appellant, this payment has been made from the capital account, Sh. AchinKochar, son of Gurmeet Kaur, with the partnership firm M/s Maja Healthcare Division which is engaged in manufacturing & sale of products in the brand name of V-John. The appellant has further stated that the VI-John Healthcare India LLP stated by the AO in the order has been inco....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....thed during course of search which was not produced or not already disclosed or made known in course of original assessment. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has affirmed the said view of the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Abhisar Buildwell (P) Ltd. (supra) wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under:- "11. As per the provisions of Section 153A, in case of a search under Section 132 or requisition under Section 132A, the AO gets the jurisdiction to assess or reassess the 'total income' in respect of each assessment year falling within six assessment years. However, it is required to be noted that as per the second proviso to Section 153A, the assessment or re-assessment, if any, relating to any assessment year falling within the period of six assessment years pending on the date of initiation of the search under Section 132 or making of requisition under Section 132A, as the case may be, shall abate. As per sub-section (2) of Section 153A, if any proceeding initiated or any order of assessment or reassessment made under sub-section (1) has been annulled in appeal or any other legal proceeding, then, notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1) or section 1....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of repetition, it is observed that the assessment under Section 153A of the Act is linked with the search and requisition under Sections 132 and 132A of the Act. The object of Section 153A is to bring under tax the undisclosed income which is found during the course of search or pursuant to search or requisition. Therefore, only in a case where the undisclosed income is found on the basis of incriminating material, the AO would assume the jurisdiction to assess or reassess the total income for the entire six years block assessment period even in case of completed/unabated assessment. As per the second proviso to Section 153A, only pending assessment/reassessment shall stand abated and the AO would assume the jurisdiction with respect to such abated assessments. It does not provide that all completed/unabated assessments shall abate. If the submission on behalf of the Revenue is accepted, in that case, second proviso to section 153A and sub-section (2) of Section 153A would be redundant and/or re-writing the said provisions, which is not permissible under the law. 13. For the reasons stated hereinabove, we are in complete agreement with the view taken by the Delhi High Court in t....