TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (11) TMI 1768
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tains or pertain to, or any information contained therein relates to a person other than the person referred to in section 153A. (ii) The satisfaction note in the instant case was properly recorded which clearly mentioned that incriminating documents seized from possession of Sh. Rakesh Kumar Yadav reveals that M/s Planet Infra Promoters Pvt. Ltd. had entered into various cash transactions with him. (iii) The AO in his satisfaction note has clearly mentioned the documents which would have been handed over to the AO of the person i.e. M/s Planet Infra Promoters Pvt. Ltd. (who was same in the instant case). (iv) During the assessment proceedings, the assessee failed to furnish any reply regarding the transactions and furthermore the assessee was unable to furnish any reason for not furnishing the explanation regarding the nature and source of these transactions. (v) The AO in his report has submitted that the documents seized from the premises of Shri Rakesh Kumar Yadav belongs to M/s Planet Infra Promoters Pvt. Ltd. and therefore, as per provisions of section 153C of the Act, a satisfaction note was recorded by the AO in the case of searched perso....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Assessee company which contains receipts of Rs. 75,00,000/- and has a bearing on the determination of the total income of the Assessee. Thereafter the Id. AO of the appellant company has recorded the satisfaction note on the same date i.e. 02.03.2016 stating the he is satisfied that Page - 19 of Annexure A-3 found and seized from the residence of Rakesh Kumar Yadav belongs to the appellant company containing receipt of Rs. 75,00,000/- and has a bearing on the determination of the total income of the appellant. Consequent upon, a notice dated 02.03.2016 under section 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (herein after referred as 'Act') to the Assessee for the assessment year 2013-14, assessing officer has passed assessment order u/s 153A(1)(b) of the Act dated 29.03.2016 by treating the said transactions as unexplained income for the assessment year 2013-14. 4. The Assessee preferred an appeal before Ld. CIT(A) and the Ld. CIT(A) vide his appellate order dated 06.09.2019 has deleted the additions holding that seized document does not "belong to" the appellant company by relying upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Singhad Technical Education Society (39....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cer in this case meets all judicially recognized bench marks that it specifically identifies the seized diary and loose sheets, it establishes a clear nexus between those documents and the assessee's cash transactions and purchase, it quantifies the undisclosed receipts and payment relatable to the assessee for AY 2013-14 and it demonstrates how the seized material impact income determination. Thus, it is submitted that the satisfaction note is neither wague nor general, it is concrete, year specific and directly linked to the incriminating documents and compliance satisfies even the height and scrutiny standards laid down by quotes. Ld. DR also filed written submissions on various other legal contentions raised by the Assessee in its Rule 27 application filed. 7. On the other hand, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that the Assessing Officer has recorded satisfaction note for initiation of proceedings under section 153C of the Act on the basis of document found and seized i.e. Page - 19 of Annexure A - 3 from the residence of Rakesh Kumar Yadav containing a narration "Received from Ajit 75 lac". On perusal of above narration on seized page it is clearly evident that name....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d up by Antriksh Group and came forward to offer 13.95 crores as their undisclosed income for the AY 2014-15 spreading over among six Companies belonging to the said group. 10. Ld. Counsel for the assessee further submitted that the Tribunal had considered almost identical facts situation in the case of Shri Jatmal Mehta on identical facts wherein the additions were made based on the seized materials found in the case of Shri Rakesh Kumar Yadav and the Tribunal held that such seized documents do not belong to or pertain to the assessee namely Shri Jatmal Mehta and the additions made therein based on such seized materials was deleted. This decision squarely applies to the facts of the assessee's case. 11. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee further submitted that the provisions of section 153C of the Act has been amended with effect from 01.06.2015 by substituting the words "belongs or belong to" with "pertains or pertain to, or any information contained therein, relates to. In case of appellant the Hon'ble CIT(A) by relying upon the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of M/s Canyon Financial Services Ltd. held that for searches before 01.06.2015, law required that seize....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Shri Ajit Singh. The reason given by the Assessing Officer in the satisfaction note to say that the transaction belongs to or pertains to the assessee is that during the course of post search enquiries and investigation the assessee submitted letter dated 16.06.2014 in the office of DDIT-II, Gurgaon wherein assessee accepted the financial transactions recorded in the seized documents through an excel sheet and on going through the excel sheet submitted by the assessee it was noted that the transactions in respect of M/s Planet Infra Promoters Pvt. Ltd. mentioned above duly matched with the entries found recorded on incriminating documents. However, we find that this letter dated 16.06.2014 purportedly said to have been filed by the assessee before the DDIT-II, Investigation, Gurgaon was not filed by the assessee but was filed by Antriksh Group of Companies and also these companies owned up all the transactions in the seized materials, and this fact was taken note of by the Tribunal while dealing with similar case in the case of DCIT vs. Shri Jethmal Mehta in ITA Nos. 8985 to 8987/Del/2019 dated 19.07.2023 wherein the Tribunal observed as under: "10. It is not in dispute t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ely dumb documents in the hands of the assessee. In our considered opinion, the assessee cannot be held to be having control over what the third person records in his regular books of accounts or in the parallel books of account. Here the seized documents are merely loose sheets not forming part of the books of account of the assessee and that they do not constitute admissible evidence and are to be merely discarded as dumb documents as there are no other corroborative material or evidence to link those documents. 11. Before us, the Ld. DR vehemently relied on the letter dated 16/06/2014 filed before the DDIT-II, Investigation, Gurugaon, accepting the financial transactions mentioned in the seized document in this regard. It is pertinent to note that the letter dated 16/06/2014 was not filed by the assessee before the Investigation Wing. Instead, this letter dated 16/06/2014 was filed by Antriksh Group before the DDIT, Investigation, Gurugaon. The assessee does not belong to Antriksh Group. The assessee also filed an affidavit clearly affirming that the letter dated 16/06/2014, accepting the financial transactions recorded in the seized documents was not filed by the asses....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of statement recorded from them u/s 132(4) of the Act had mentioned even the name of the assessee anywhere. The copy of the statements recorded from them are enclosed pages 1 to 40 of the Paper Book filed by the Department before us. Hence, no proceedings per se could be initiated on the assessee u/s 153C of the Act based on the seized documents found in the premises of Rakesh Kumar Yadav and Rajbir Goyat. Accordingly, we do find any infirmity in the observations made by the Ld. CIT(A) in para 6.10 from (i) to (iv) in page 26 of his order. Accordingly, revised grounds (i) & (ii) raised by the Revenue are dismissed and revised ground (hi) raised by the Revenue is allowed." 14. As could be seen from para 11 of the Tribunal's order the letter dated 16.06.2014 which the AO referred to in the satisfaction note and the transactions therein, were owned up and already offered to tax by 6 companies in Antriksh Group of Companies. Therefore, the satisfaction note recorded by the AO in the case of the assessee that the assessee submitted a letter dated 16.06.2014 and accepted the financial transactions recorded in the seized documents through excel sheet and the transactions mentioned the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r: There are huge numbers of cash transactions revealed by cash receipts and payments which have been found recorded in these incriminating documents. These incriminating documents were found from the possession of Sh. Rakesh Yadav. The perusal of pages reveals transactions madı for M/s Planet Infrapromoters (P) Ltd. During the course of post search enquires & investigation assessce submitted a letter dated 16.06.2014 in the office of DDIT-II, Gurgaon vide which he accepted the financial transactions recorded in the seized documents through an Excel sheet. Or going through the excel sheet submitted by the assessee it was noted that the transactions ir respect M/s Planet Infrapromoters (P) Ltd. as mentioned above duly matched with the entries found recorded on incriminating documents. The details of transactions with Sh. Aiit singh are tabulated on the following chart: documents. details with Sh. Aiit singh are ANNEX URE .PAGE NO. YE AR MON THI D A Y FOUND FROM RECEIPTS (IN RS.] PAYMENT (IN RS.) DESCRIP TION AS PER SEIZED DOCUM ENT REMA RKS RELATED PROJECT COMPAN Y 3 19 20 13 16 RAKESH HARID PLANET 1 YADAV 7500000 AUIT WAR NRI CITY INFRA As from the abo....