TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (1) TMI 1498
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... orders of even date 23.12.2019. 2. At the outset, it is noticed that these appeals by both the assessees are barred by limitation by 23 days. The assessees have received the impugned appellate order on 25.03.2021 and appeal was to be filed on or before 24.05.2021 but actually it was filed on 16.06.2021 thereby there was a delay of 23 days. The ld. counsel for the assessees stated that this delay is due to pandemic period of Covid 19 and subsequent events and the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Miscellaneous Application No. 665 of 2021 vide order dated 23.03.2020 has given directions that the delay are to be condoned during this period 15.03.2020 to 14.03.2021 and they have condoned the delay up to 28.02.2022 in Miscellaneous Application No. 21 of 2022 vide order dated 10.01.2022. Since the Hon'ble Supreme Court has condoned the delay during the said period, respectfully following the same we condone the delay and admit the appeals. 3. The first common issue in all these 12 appeals of both the assessees is as regards to the orders of CIT (A) and orders of AO, committing grave errors in violating the principles of natural justice and completing the assessments within '26 days' ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tter dated 20.11.2019. The assessee filed his objections vide letter dated 28.11.2019. Subsequently, the assessment was completed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 153C of the Act vide order dated 23.12.2019, ex-parte. The assessee challenged the assessment order before CIT (A) and the CIT (A) passed appellate order in ITA No. 771/2019-20 vide order dated 25.03.2021 confirming the additions. 4. Now before us, the ld. counsel for the assessee filed the dates and events and chronology of orders passed, notice issued, etc., which reads as under:- # Date Event 1. 15.02.2018 Search conducted u/s. 132 of the Act. 2. 20.08.2019 Centralization of the case with the ACIT, Central Circle 2, Trichy 3. 05.09.2019 Notice u/s. 153C of the Act issued by the ACIT, Central Circle-2, Trichy 4. 17.10.2019 ROI e-filed by Petitioner in response to the 153C notice. 5. 22.10.2019 Notice u/s. 143(2) issued by the ACIT, Central Circle-1, Trichy 6. 06.11.2019 Show-cause notice proposing to make additions by ACIT, Central Circle-1, Trichy. 7. 07.11.2019 Transfer of case from ACIT, Central Circle-2 to the ACIT, Central Circle-1, Trichy. 8. 18.11.2019 Adjournment letter filed by the Appellant....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....exactly on identical facts, Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case of B.Kubendran vs. DCIT [2021] 126 taxmann.com 107 (Madras) wherein the Hon'ble High Court has discussed the facts that the time allowed in this case was two months and this fact is recorded by Hon'ble High Court in para 25 & 26 as under:- 25. On the question of adherence to the principles of natural justice, the relevant sequence of dates and events is that a notice under Section 153C was issued on 25.10.2019 in regard to a search conducted in 2017. Unfortunately neither the affidavit filed in support of the writ petitions nor the impugned orders of assessment anywhere mention the date of search and it was only in the course of the submissions made orally that the date of search was noted by me as 07.11.2017. The limitation for completion of assessments would be the 31st of December, 2019. The impugned orders state that centralization of the assessments took place only on 24.09.2019 and pursuant to the centralization, notices under Section 153C were issued on 25.10.2019, leaving barely a period of a little over two months for completion of six search assessments. 26. The notice under Section 153C called upo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f search. However, such report has to be put to the assessee and his full and complete response sought prior to using the same against him. This has not been done in the present case. Thus, while the reference to valuation is in order, the decision making process is flawed and in violation of the principles of natural justice. 35. There is no explanation set forth in counter or at the time of hearing to explain why the assessment had been taken up for completion, at the very fag end of limitation and for this reason, I believe I would have been justified, had I annulled the assessments, as a second innings is not to be granted to the department, merely as a matter of rote. However, and solely as a matter of prudence, I set aside the assessments with a direction to the respondent to issue notices afresh, hear the petitioner and pass orders of assessments within a period of eight (8) weeks from today, with sufficient time being given to the petitioner to putforth his submissions on merits. 5. When these facts were confronted to ld. CIT-DR, he started arguing on merits of the case that these are all these are agreed additions and completion of assessment is just merely a formali....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h is the starting point where the principles of natural justice are clearly violated. Hence, he requested that the assessment orders and the orders of CIT (A) be set aside and matter be remanded back to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication in term of law. 6. After hearing rival contentions and going through the facts of the case, first of all we have gone through the communication received from PCIT dated 04.12.2019, wherein PCIT informed assessee that the assessment proceedings is getting time barred on 31.12.2019 and he informed the AO also. Once the PCIT has given his view that assessment is getting time barred on 31.12.2019, the AO was under pressure to complete the scrutiny / search assessment but actually the time barring was 31.12.2020 in the present assessment years. It means that the Department from the beginning was under wrong notion that the assessments will get time barred by 31.12.2019. From the chronology of events, it is clear that search was conducted in the group cases on 15.02.2018 and notification for centralization with the present PCIT charge was notified only on 15.11.2019 that means the Department took atleast 1 year & 9 months and Department was sle....