TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (3) TMI 1857
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the ld. DR has submitted that the matter in ITA No. 1399/JP/2024 may be taken as a lead case for discussions as the issues involved in the lead case are common and inextricably interlinked or in fact interwoven and the facts and circumstances of other cases are identical except the difference in the amount of addition. The ld. AR did not raise any specific objection against taking that case as a lead case. Therefore, for the purpose of the present discussions, the case of ITA No. 1399/JP/2024 is taken as a lead. 4. Before moving towards the facts of the case we would like to mention that the revenue has assailed the appeal for assessment year 2014-15 in ITA No. 1399/JP/2024 on the following grounds; "(i) Whether on the facts and in circumstances of the case, the Id. CIT(A) has erred in deleting all the additions made by A.O only on technical ground without giving any finding on the merits of additions? (ii) Whether on the facts and in circumstances of the case, the Id. CIT(A) has erred in holding notice u/s 153C invalid without appreciating that there is specific reference to incriminating seized in the satisfaction note recorded by A.O for the issue of notice....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed in deleting all the additions made by A.O without appreciating that the certain additions made by A.O are based on findings of proceedings? search/post search proceedings? (iv) The appellant craves leave or reserves right to amend, modify, alter, add or forego any ground(s) of appeal at any time before or during the hearing of this appeal. 2. The appellant craves leave to add, amend or withdraw any of the ground of appeal during the course of appeal proceedings. 4.3 In ITA No. 1486/JP/2024, revenue has raised following grounds: - 1.(i) Whether on the facts and in circumstances of the case, the Id. CIT(A) has erred in deleting addition of Rs. 3,60,22,825/- made by A.O u/s 68 and addition of Rs. 90,057/-made by A.O u/s 69C without appreciating the facts discussed by A.O in the assessment order such as statement of director of loan giving company recorded u/s 132(4) and post search inquiry findings, which proved non genuineness of the unsecured loan claimed by assessee? (ii) Whether on the facts and in circumstances of the case, the Id. CIT(A) has erred in deleting addition of Rs. 3,60,22,825/- made by A.O u/s 68 and addition of Rs. 90,057/-ma....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....onnaire. Later queries were raised vide notices under section 142(1) and/or Order Sheet Entries wherever deemed fit. The information furnished by the Assessee's Counsel was examined and placed on record. 5.2 The ld. AO in the assessment proceeding noted that the assessee has shown unsecured loan from various entities including M/s Inner Merchantile Pvt. Ltd. The year wise detail of the same is tabulated as under: S. No. Related to AY Amount (in Rs. ) 1 2014-15 5906725/- 5.3 Further, it is also observed that the assessee has not paid any interest to the lender company on the said unsecured loans. 5.4 From perusal of ITR, Balance Sheet and Profit and Loss account of the company M/s Inner Merchantile Pvt. Ltd. it is found that the Company is not involved in any business activity. The company is showing its income mainly from interest, dividend, commission and capital gains only. The company has no business activity and despite the said company has shown a large amount in security premium account and using these funds for giving loans. The company is using their funds for investment in unlisted equity shares and providing loans only. 5.5 From perusal o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... received the loan through cheque. Ld. AO considered the reply of the assessee but was not found tenable and this loan transaction was considered as Sham and thereby made an addition of Rs. 59,06,725/-. 5.10 While doing so he also made an addition of Rs. 14,766/- being the commission @ 0.25 % on acquiring the accommodation entry. 5.11 The assessee has shown cash credit under the head unsecured loan from Shri Pooran Mal Kanwat and the outstanding amount comes to Rs. 2,05,00,000/-. Ld. AO considered the ITR of lender Shri Pooran Mal Kanwat wherein the return of income filed by that lender was much below the amount advanced. Therefore, he holds a view that he is not a person of having credit worthiness to the extent of the huge loan therefore, the loan amount was considered as unexplained credit in the hands of the assessee. 5.12 Similarly assessee has also shown cash credit received from Shri Sitaram Meena for an amount of Rs. 5,89,52,868/-. Ld. AO considered the income disclosed by that Sitaram Meena in the ITR filed of meager income and the money advanced being huge. Ld. AO recorded that creditor wherein confirmed that the bank account from where that credit comes were ope....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... as against the observations/findings of the AO in the assessment order for the year under consideration. The contentions/submissions of the appellant are being discussed and decided as under:- The brief facts from the assessment order are that a search and seizure action u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") and/or survey action u/s 133A of the Act was carried out by the Income Tax Department on the members of Kiran Fine Jewellers Group on 02-03-2017. On being satisfied that the books of accounts or documents found and seized during the search belonged to a person other than the person in the case of whom the search u/s 132 of the Act was carried out, notice(s) under section(s) 153C of the Act dated 08-08-2019 was issued and served upon the Assessee, requiring him to file a true and correct return of income. Certain additions have been made in the assessment order. (ii) The appellant has argued that (1) Satisfaction of the Assessing Officer should be based on cogent material and should not be arrived at in a casual manner, (ii) Assessing Officer should record satisfaction in respect of each of the assessment years, (iii) Seized material should not only ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... during the course of search belonged to the assessee The Assessing Officer has miserably failed in mentioning in unequivocal terms w.r.t. which books of accounts or document if any belonging to the assessee was seized during the course of search in whose case, as search and survey referred to by the Assessing Officer in the case of Kiran Fine Jewellers Group is not recognisable to law. The Assessing Officer is obligated to record his satisfaction with respect to the Books of accounts and documents belonging to the assessee, seized during the course of search action in the case of a person in whose case warrant u/s 132(1) of the income tax act was issued. Needless to say that "Kiran fine Jewellers Group' is not a person and no search and seizure action has been carried out in the case of "Kiran Fine Jewellers Group". The Assessing Officer is not sure of the identity of the person from whom the documents belonging to the assessee were seized. The satisfaction is general, vague and does not satisfy the preconditions of section 153C of the Act so as to force the humble appellant to undergo the rigors of Section 153C of the Income Tax Act. The Assessing O....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rein certain loose papers/registered sale deeds/agreement and other documents were found and seized and inventorized as Annexure-AS Exhibit-1to 6. These papers are copy of sale agreement dated 08.11.2012 executed between Shri Prabhu and Shri Hari Narayan s/o late Shri Sujya and Smt. Sanya Devi w/o Late Shri Sujya Gurjar, VillageGoner, Tehsil- Sanganer, Jaipur (Sellers) and M/s Udai Buildhome Private Limited, 302. Golden Sunrise Apartment, Lajpat Sunrise Apartment, C-Scheme, Jaipur for sale of immovable property admeasuring 04 bigha & 16 biswa situated in Khasra Nos. 1545/3473, 1814, 1815, 1818, 1819, 1820, 1821, 1822, 1824, 1825, 1827, 1828, 1829, 1830, 1831/3725, 1831, 1832, 1833, 1834 Village- Goner, Tehsil Sanganer, Jaipur at a total sale consideration of R.s 2,16,00,000/- ie, at Rs. 45,00,000/- per bigha. The said agreement was written on Rs. 1000/- stamp paper purchased by Mis Udai Buildhome Private Limited on 06.11.2012. A sum of Rs. 11,00,000/- was also stated to have been received in cash by the sellers of the land from M/s Udai Buildhome Private Limited and it is agreed upon to pay the remaining amount till 30.11.2012 and on receipt of remaining sale consideration, the sel....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ome of M/s Udai Buildhome Pvt. Ltd. in accordance with provision of Section 153A of I.T. Act. (v) From the perusal of the satisfaction note of the assessing authority recorded before the issuance of the present notice under section 153C of the Act it is noticed that it is a combined satisfaction note for the AYS 2012-13 to 2017-18 and the satisfaction was recorded with respect to the seized documents regarding the transactions in the immovable property and the dates of the documents are (i) sale agreement dated 08.11.2012. (ii) stamp paper purchased by M/s Udai Buildhome Private Limited on 06.11.2012, (iii) it was agreed upon to pay the remaining amount till 30.11.2012, (iv) registered sale deed dated 29.11.2012 The assessing authority has also noted in the satisfaction note that M/s Udai Buildhome Private Limited has executed a sale agreement with the sellers for sale of their immovable property situated at Village-Goner, Tehsil- Sanganer, Jaipur for total consideration of Rs. 2,16,00,000/- and a sum of Rs. 11,00,000/- was given as token money in cash to the land owner however registered sale deed was executed by the land owners in the name of M/s Udai Buildhome ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to explain debit and credit entries in the account no. 00203110000005475 held in Malyia Urban Cooperative Bank, Jaipur. In reply to the same he categorically admitted that his account was being used by Shri Charan Singh Khangarot and others. He further admitted that in the said account no transaction has been made as his individual capacity. He categorically admitted that the account was opened on the direction of Shri Charan Singh Khangarot and same was used by him. (vi)-(i) From the perusal of the satisfaction note and of the assessment order, it is noticed that the issue on which the addition has been made in the assessment order is not referred in the satisfaction note. Further, in the discussion on the addition in the assessment order that there is no reference to seized material from the search and seizure action. (vii) It is held by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of [2024] 161 taxmann.com 485 (Delhi) SAKSHAM COMMODITIES Ltd. v. INCOME TAX OFFICER as under:- "37. Having noticed the rival contentions which were addressed, we firstly take note of the evident distinction that exists between Section 153A and Section 153C. They are clearly ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n the determination of the total income of such other person". This is manifest from the provision employing the expression "if, that Assessing Officer is satisfied.". It would therefore necessarily follow that the issuance of a notice under Section 153C is clearly not intended to be an inevitable consequence to the receipt of material by the jurisdictional AO. That the AO before commencement of action under Section 153C is also obliged to be satisfied that the material so received would "have a bearing on the determination of the total income of such other person" is an aspect of significance and constitutes a fundamental point of distinction between Section 153A and Section 153C. This distinguishing element of the two provisions would become further apparent from the discussion which ensues. .................. ................. 47. This too speaks of "relevancy" as one of the meanings one may gather where that particular expression is used. This leads us to the inevitable conclusion that the initiation of action under Section 153C would have to be founded on a formation of opinion by the jurisdictional AO that the material handed over and received pursu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the search and which may have no plausible nexus. The aforesaid position also comes to the fore when one reads para 17 of ARN Infrastructure and which annulled an action aimed at reopening assessments for years to which the incriminating document which was found did not relate. 53. Sinhgad Technical Education Society also constitutes a binding precedent in respect of the aforesaid proposition as would be evident from the Supreme Court noticing that the material disclosed pertained only to AY 2004-05 or thereafter and that consequently the Section 153C action initiated for AYs' 2000-01 to 2003-04 would not sustain. It was this position in law as enunciated in that decision which came to be reiterated by our Court in Index Securities. 54. In any case, Abhisar Buildwell, in our considered opinion, is a decision which conclusively lays to rest any doubt that could have been possibly harboured. The Supreme Court in unequivocal terms held that absent incriminating material, the AO would not be justified in seeking to assess or reassess completed assessments. Though the aforesaid observations were rendered in the context of completed assessments, the same position....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....overed in the course of a search having the potential or the probability of constituting incriminating material for more than one assessment year. However, even if such a situation were assumed to arise, it would be incumbent upon the AO to duly record reasons in support of such a conclusion. The Satisfaction Notes would thus have to evidence a formation of opinion that the material is likely to be incriminating for more than a singular assessment year and thus warranting the drawl of Section 153C proceedings for years in addition to those to which the material may be directly relatable. ................. ........................... 64. In our considered view, abatement of the six AYs' or the "relevant assessment year" under Section 153C would follow the formation of opinion and satisfaction being reached that the material received is likely to impact the computation of income for a particular AY or AYs' that may form part of the block of ten AYs'. Abatement would be triggered by the formation of that opinion rather than the other way around. This, in light of the discernibly distinguishable statutory regime underlying Sections 153A and 153C a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... encompass AYs 2014-15 to 2020-21. Insofar as AYs other than AY 2019-20 are concerned the impugned action would clearly not sustain bearing in mind the judgment rendered by the Court in Saksham Commodities Limited v. Income Tax Officer, Ward 22(1), Delhi & Anr [2024 SCC OnLine Del 2551] and where while explaining the statutory imperatives of incriminating material we had held as follows: ............................ 3. That only leaves us to examine the contention of Mr. Jolly, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, who submits that even for AY 2019-20 the Assessing Officer ["AO"] does not refer to any incriminating material. According to learned counsel the mere recovery of a ledger account cannot possibly be construed as being incriminating 4. We find ourselves unable to pursue this line of inquiry which is suggested bearing in mind the obvious disputed issues of fact which arise. We also bear in consideration the following conclusions and observations as they appear in the satisfaction note as drawn. ............................ 5. In view of the aforesaid, the writ petition partly succeeds. The impugned action under Section 15....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the order of the ITAT reveals that the ITAT had scanned through the Satisfaction Note and the material which was disclosed therein was culled out and it showed that the same belongs to Assessment Year 2004-05 or thereafter. After taking note of the material in para 9 of the order, the position that emerges therefrom is discussed in para 10. It was specifically recorded that the counsel for the Department could not point out to the contrary. It is for this reason the High Court has also given its imprimatur to the aforesaid approach of the Tribunal. That apart, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent, argued that notice in respect of Assessment Years 2000-01 and 2001-02 was even time barred. 19. We, thus, find that the ITAT rightly permitted this additional ground to be raised and correctly dealt with the same ground on merits as well. Order of the High Court affirming this view of the Tribunal is, therefore, without any blemish. Before us, it was argued by the respondent that notice in respect of the Assessment Years 2000-01 and 2001-02 was time barred. However, in view of our aforementioned findings, it is not necessary to enter into this controversy." ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing Assessing Officer, i.e., the Assessing Officer of the third party reflects a clear finding that the incriminating material received has a bearing on determination of total income of the third party for 6 assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which search is conducted or requisition is made, that such notice would have to be issued for all the years. 82. It thus flows from the provision that the receiving assessing officer must apply his mind to the materials received and ascertain precisely the specific year to which the incriminating material relates. It is only when this determination/ascertainment is complete that the flood gates of an assessment would open qua those particular years. The issuance of a notice cannot be an automated function unconnected to this exercise of analysis and ascertainment by an assessing officer. 83. The construction of section 153A and 153C is consciously different and is seen to apply different yardsticks to an entity searched and a third party, such yardstick being more exacting in the case of the former. The process of assessment is demanding and an assessee, once in receip....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ecision in the case of Pr. CIT v. Abhisar Buildwell (P.) Ltd. [2023] 149 taxmann.com 399 (SC), more particularly, paragraphs 11 and 13, has prayed to observe that the Revenue may be permitted to initiate re-assessment proceedings under section 147/148 of the Act as in the aforesaid decision, the powers of the re-assessment of the Revenue even in case of the block assessment under section 153A of the Act have been saved. ..................... 3. However, so far as the prayer made on behalf of the Revenue to permit them to initiate the reassessment proceedings is concerned, it is observed that it will be open for the Revenue to initiate the re-assessment proceedings in accordance with law and if it is permissible under the law. (xii) In view of the above discussion and considering the ratio of the judgements cited by the appellant, before the issuance of notice under section 153C of the Act for any year, the assessing authority is required to record satisfaction and the satisfaction must refer to the seized material pertaining to / having information with respect to such year and the satisfaction should refer to the impact or implication of the same Le that....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ent under section ...................... 3. However, so far as the prayer made on behalf of the Revenue to permit them to initiate the reassessment proceedings is concerned, it is observed that it will be open for the Revenue to initiate the re-assessment proceedings in accordance with law and if it is permissible under the law. (emphasis supplied) In para 11 of the order in case of Principal Commissioner of Income-tax, Central-3 v. Abhisar Buildwell (P.) Ltd. ([2023] 149 taxmann.com 399 (SC)/[2023] 293 Taxman 141 (SC)/([2023] 454 ITR 212 (SC)(24-04-2023]), the Hon'ble Supreme Court inter-alia has held as under:- "11 However, in case during the search no incriminating material is found, in case of completed/unabated assessment, the only remedy available to the Revenue would be to initiate the reassessment proceedings under sections 147/48 of the Act, subject to fulfilment of the conditions mentioned in sections 147/148, as in such a situation, the Revenue cannot be left with no remedy. Therefore, even in case of block assessment under section 153A and in case of unabated/completed assessment and in case no incriminating material is found d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of Pr.CIT (Central-3) v/s Abhisar Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. (Civil Appeal No. 6580 of 2021)-Instruction regarding. The learned assessing officer is directed to implement the law and ratio of the judgement of Abhisar Buildwell (supra) and U. K. Paints (supra), as referred above, and take appropriate action in the case of the appellant as per appropriately considering the said Instruction No. 1 of 2023 dated 23-08-2023 as per the facts of the case. Accordingly, this ground of appeal of the appellant is hereby allowed in above terms. Finding of ld. CIT(A) on merits of the dispute 5.2 I have considered the facts of the case and written submissions of the appellant as against the observations/findings of the AO in the assessment order for the year under consideration. The contentions/submissions of the appellant are being discussed and decided as under:- In the earlier part of this order, the validity of the notice u/s 153C has not been sustained and also it has been held that the additions done by the learned assessing officer in the assessment order is not sustainable on the technical ground that the addition is not based on any seized material received f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ided as under:- In the earlier part of this order, the validity of the notice u/s 153C has not been sustained and also it has been held that the additions done by the learned assessing officer in the assessment order is not sustainable on the technical ground that the addition is not based on any seized material received from search action on the searched person. In view of this background, the other grounds of appeal on the merits of such addition are rendered only academic and do not warrant detailed adjudication. In view of this discussion, the subject ground of appeal raised by the appellant is treated as disposed off. 7. The ld. DR is heard who relied on the order of the assessment and stated that the addition was made by the ld.AO based on the material found and detailed enquiry conducted in the assessment proceeding. The assessee has accepted huge sum of money from the shell companies and the accepted the loan having no worth. Even the ld. AO has recorded the statement of the parties while making the addition. When the matter was carried before the ld. CIT(A) he has not given finding on the merits of the dispute as the ld. AO has given the finding on each aspect ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....red. Therefore, in the return of income filed in response to notice u/s 153A of the Act, additional income of Rs. 8,50,814/- pertaining to the relevant year has been declared by the Assessee which was not declared in the original return filed u/s 139 of the Act. The Assessee-company primarily derives its income from builder and construction. The proceedings of assessment of income were commenced by issue of notice u/s 143(2) of the Act on 09-10-2019. Later notice u/s 142(1) dated 09-10-2019 was also issued to the assessee and information and details pertaining to the case relevant to assessment of its income were called by means of a questionnaire. The ld. AO in the assessment proceeding noted that the assessee has shown unsecured loan from various entities including M/s Inner Mercantile Pvt. Ltd. Further, it is also observed that the assessee has not paid any interest to the lender company on the said unsecured loans. That company is not involved in any business activity shows income mainly from interest, dividend, commission and capital gains only. Despite that said company has shown a large amount in security premium account and using these funds for loans. The company is ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... argued that (1) Satisfaction of the Assessing Officer should be based on cogent material and should not be arrived at in a casual manner, (ii) Assessing Officer should record satisfaction in respect of each of the assessment years, (iii) Seized material should not only belong to /or should be related to the assessee but should also be of incriminating nature i.e should have a bearing on the determination of total income of the assessee, (iv) There was no satisfaction as to the seized material pertaining to the following assessment years as no reference to any seized material has been made either in any show cause notice or a questionnaire or even in the assessment order. (i). Α.Υ. 2014-15, (ii). A.Y. 2015-16, (iii), Α.Υ. 2017-18, (ίν). Α.Υ. 2018-19. Therefore the assessee submitted that for these years no documents were found having any incriminating material. All the additions which were made are already recorded in the regular books of accounts. Thus, there is absolutely no material found during the course of search in the case of any person which either belongs to the appellant or contain any information about the assessee-appel....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e absence of satisfaction as mandated u/s 153C of the Act, the very initiation of proceedings u/s 153C of the Income Tax Act becomes illegal, bad in law and without jurisdiction. Not only that the while going through the satisfaction note we note that it does not deal with incriminating material belonging to the assessee pertaining to the A.Y.2013-14. While referring to the various document found Assessing officer has referred to a sale agreement Page 20-26 Exhibit -6 Annexure -A5 seized during the course of search at the premises of Shri Charan Singh Khangarot which is between Shri Prabhu and Shri Hari Narayan (sellers) and M/s Udai Buildhome Pvt Ltd (Buyer), the appellant. The alleged agreement to sale contains the signatures of the sellers but does not contain signatures of assessee-appellant on it. Therefore, the said document cannot be said belonging to the appellant. Further, Assessing Officer has also referred to another document found from the premises of Shri Ashok Singh which is between Shri Prabhu and Shri Hari Narayan (sellers) and M/s Manokamna Build square Pvt Ltd (buyer), though the Assessing Officer in the assessment order at Para 7.3 Pg 3 has wrongly mentioned t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... registered sale deed dated 29.11.2012 executed for sale of land situated in Khasra Nos. 1545/3473, 1814, 1815, 1818, 1819, 1820, 1821, 1822, 1824, 1825, 1827, 1828, 1829, 1830, 1831/3725, 1831, 1832, 1833, 1834 Village-Goner, Tehsil- Sanganer, Jaipur by Shri Prabhu and Shri Hari Narayan s/o late Shri Sujya and Smt. Sanya Devi w/o Late Shri Sujya Gurjar, Village-Goner, Tehsil- Sanganer, Jaipur in favour of M/s Udai Buildhome Private Limited, 302, Golden Sunrise Apartment, Lajpat Sunrise Apartment, C-Scheme, Jaipur for sale consideration of Rs. 1,23,97,500/-. On perusal of both the documents vis-à-vis it is gathered that M/s Udai Buildhome Private Limited has executed a sale agreement with the sellers for sale of their immovable property situated at Village-Goner, Tehsil-Sanganer, Jaipur for total consideration of Rs. 2,16,00,000/- and a sum of Rs. 11,00,000/- was given as token money in cash to the landowner however registered sale deed was executed by the land owners in the name of M/s Udai Buildhome Private Limited at sale consideration of Rs. 1,23,97,500/- which is lower than the sale consideration reported in sale agreement. Thus, it is inferred that the difference am....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hich was arrived at based on the above documents the notices under section 153C of the Act were issued for the years AYs 2012-13 to 2017-18. The bench noted that in the satisfaction note there is no reference to any seized material / transaction pertaining to any year other than the financial year 2012-13. In the assessment order for the year under appeal the addition has been made with respect to the loan received by the appellant from Inner Mercantile Pvt. Ltd. In this regard it is noticed in the assessment order that an enquiry was conducted by DDIT-2, Jaipur wherein an inspector is deputed for verification of business activity of the bogus companies which includes the lender company M/s Inner Mercantile Pvt. Ltd. The Inspector report reveals that it is clear the companies are not in existence in their registered addresses and holding offices but on those addresses a combined office of various companies were found, which is used only for receiving Dak (mail). Hence in the field enquiry as well as no business activities were found by these Companies from their registered addresses. Further, the enquiry was conducted u/s 133(6) of the I.T. Act and notice was issued to the lende....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... books of account or documents or assets, seized or requisitioned shall be handed over to the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction over such other person and that Assessing Officer shall proceed against each such other person and issue notice and assess or reassess the income of the other person in accordance with the provisions of section 153A, if, that Assessing Officer is satisfied that the books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned have a bearing on the determination of the total income of such other person for six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which search is conducted or requisition is made and for the relevant assessment year or years referred to in sub-section (1) of section 153A: Provided that in case of such other person, the reference to the date of initiation of the search under section 132 or making of requisition under section 132A in the second proviso to sub-section (1) of 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 Assessing Officer having jurisdiction over such other person....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t provision speaks of the commencement point being the handing over of documents or assets seized or requisitioned to the AO of the "other person" and it in turn proceeding to issue notice to assess or reassess the income of the non-searched entity in accordance with Section 153A. However, the initiation of action under Section 153C is significantly premised upon the AO being satisfied that the books of account or documents and assets seized or requisitioned having "a bearing on the determination of the total income of such other person". This is manifested from the provision employing the expression "if, that Assessing Officer is satisfied". It would therefore necessarily follow that the issuance of a notice under Section 153C is clearly not intended to be an inevitable consequence to the receipt of material by the jurisdiction AO. That the AO before commencement of action under Section 153C is also obliged to be satisfied that the material so received would "have a bearing on the determination of the total income of such other person" is an aspect of significance and constitutes a fundamental point of distinction between Section 153A and Section 153C. Thus, the issue of assessmen....