TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (7) TMI 678
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cated by this common order. Further, we have noted that in all its appeals, the assessee has raised legal grounds challenging jurisdiction sufficiency and validity of the assessment. The Latin legal maxim Sublato fundamento cadit opus that corresponds to hypothesis that a superstructure does not survive on weak foundation is essential part of jurisprudence. This maxim literally translates to, "If the foundation is removed, the superstructure falls". It is a well-established principle in law, especially in cases where the initial action or underlying basis of a legal right is found to be invalid, causing all subsequent actions dependent on it to fail. Another related maxim with a similar meaning is Debile fundamentum fall it opus, which translates to "Where there is a weak foundation, the work fails". As grounds of appeal concerning legal grounds are concerning, the presumption of lack of jurisdiction with the Ld.AO to pass the assessment order as well as validity of assessment, we would like to take the same first. It is trite law that a superstructure does not survive on weak foundation. Considering small difference in the legal challenges raised by the assessee, we would be adjud....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Ld. AO in making a protective addition of Rs. 2,25,000/- under section 69 of the Act, in respect of the amount credited in the bank accounts of the assessee, as unexplained investments as per para 5.7 of the order, without bringing on record any incriminating material and without appreciating the submissions and evidences placed on record. 7. That having regard to the fact and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has further erred in law and on facts in confirming the said additions by recording incorrect facts and findings, without providing the opportunity of cross-examination, and without observing the principle of natural justice, thereby rendering the addition bad in law and liable to be deleted. 8. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in not reversing the action of Ld. AO in charging interest under sections 234A and 234B of Income Tax Act, 1961. 4. The main issue arising from the appeal of the Assessee, raised through its legal ground of appeal number 2 is regarding the decision of ld. CIT(A) in not giving relief to the assessee by not relying upon the judgment of Hon'ble Delhi Hi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Ys 2020-21& 2021-22 could only have been framed in accordance with section 153C read with section 153A. It has been submitted that in its case the search was conducted on 18/10/2019 and that the satisfaction qua assessee was recorded by the AO of searched person on 14/2/2022. In this regard, it is submitted that in respect of the assessment proceedings under section 153C of the Act, the block period of six assessment years has to be reckoned from the date on which the seized material is received by the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction over the assessee (i.e., the "other person"). Thus, it has been indicated that the block of 6 assessment years to be reckoned from the date of deemed search u/s. 153C would be AY's 2016-17 to AY's 2021-22. However, in the present case, the Assessing Officer has framed the assessment for AYs 2020-21 & 2021-22 under section 143(3) of the Act, disregarding the mandatory scheme of section 153C. Such an assessment, having been framed outside the statutory framework applicable to a case falling under section 153C, is without jurisdiction and liable to be quashed. In support of its contentions the Ld council has placed reliance upon the principle laid d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... six assessment years and not regarding the assessment of the preceding six assessment years which will be the same as in section 153A as well as in section 153C of the Act. In this regard she placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of SSP Aviation Ltd. vs. DCIT (supra). 2. We find that an identical issue has been decided by Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of DSL Properties P. Ltd. (supra) in favour of the assessee accepting the similar contention of the assessee. Similar view has been expressed by the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of V.K. Fiscal (supra) holding that the date of receiving of the seized documents would become the date of search and six years period would be reckoned from this date. For a ready reference para no. 19, 21, 22 & 23 of the decision of Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of DSL Properties (supra) are being reproduced hereunder: 1. We thus, find that the issue raised in the additional ground has been answered in favour of the assessee, by the Coordinate Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of DSL Properties (supra). 2. So far as decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the additional ground no. 4 in the present case is decided in favour of the assessee and in the result the assessment order is quashed as void...." 15. It was submitted that the aforesaid decision of the Hon'ble ITAT Delhi was carried in appeal by the Revenue before the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax-14 versus Shree Jasjit Singh, 2015(8) TMI 982 - Delhi High Court, Dated. - August 11, 2015, wherein the Hon'ble High Court affirmed the findings of the Tribunal and upheld the view that the date of receipt of seized documents by the Assessing Officer of the "other person" is the deemed date of search for the purposes of section 153C of the Act. Thereafter, the matter was carried to the Hon'ble Supreme Court by the Revenue in Commissioner of Income Tax-14 vs Jasjit Singh, 2023(10) TMI 572 - Supreme Court, Dated.- September 26, 2023, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court dismissed the appeal of the revenue affirming the judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court, thereby settling the legal position conclusively. The Ld council further argued that impugned findings also echo in the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....facts of present case are identical to those discussed in judicial precedents supra. There is no dispute regarding the dated of recording of satisfaction of Ld AO of searched person. Accordingly in respectful compliance to the binding judicial precedents of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court as well as of Hon'ble Apex court, we are of the considered view that the Assessment order for the AY 20-21 ought to have been passed by the Ld AO invoking provisions of section 153C and that consequently the passing of assessment order by issuing notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act has caused an incurable and fatal defect in the assessment order per se. Accordingly we set aside and quash the assessment order for AY 2020-21 challenged by the assessee in its ITA number 3646/Del/2025 through the additional ground of appeal. 11. The respondent Revenue could not put up anything on record to suggest any distinguishment of facts. In its decision in the case of Ojjus Medicare (supra), Hon'ble Delhi High Court has laid down that the date of recording of satisfaction note/receipt of seized documents by the AO of the person other than the searched person, shall be deemed as date of search for calculation of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ances of the case and in law, the notice u/s. 153C dated 30.09.2021 issued by Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle -27 does not contain Document Identification Number (DIN) and therefore the same is invalid and non-est on account of being in direct violation to the Circular No. 19/2019 dated 14.08.2019 issued by Central Board of Direct Taxes and accordingly be liable to be quashed and deemed to have never been issued. 5. That having regard to the fact and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has further erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of the Ld. AO in making a protective addition of Rs. 49,05,000/- under section 68 of the Act as amount credited in bank, as per para 5.6 of the assessment order, without bringing on record any incriminating material and without appreciating the submissions and evidences placed on record. 6. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in making the addition of Rs. 99,06,893/- under the head "Income from Other Sources" as reflected in the Tax Computation Sheet, despite there being no discussion, finding, or reasoning for such addition in the ass....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at having regard to the fact and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has further erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of the Ld. AO in making a protective addition of Rs. 14,06,000/- under section 68 of the Act as amount credited in bank, as per para 5.6 of the assessment order, without bringing on record any incriminating material and without appreciating the submissions and evidences placed on record. 6. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in making the addition of Rs. 28,18,862/- under the head "Income from Other Sources" as reflected in the Tax Computation Sheet, despite there being no discussion, finding, or reasoning for such addition in the assessment order, thereby rendering the addition arbitrary, unjustified, and bad in law. 7. That having regard to the fact and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has further erred in law and on facts in confirming the said additions by recording incorrect facts and findings, without providing the opportunity of cross-examination, and without observing the principle of natural justice, thereby rendering the addition bad in l....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hat having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in making the addition of Rs. 32,10,301/- under the head "Income from Other Sources" as reflected in the Tax Computation Sheet, despite there being no discussion, finding, or reasoning for such addition in the assessment order, thereby rendering the addition arbitrary, unjustified, and bad in law. 7. That having regard to the fact and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has further erred in law and on facts in confirming the said additions by recording incorrect facts and findings, without providing the opportunity of cross-examination, and without observing the principle of natural justice, thereby rendering the addition bad in law and liable to be deleted. 8. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in not reversing the action of Ld. AO in charging interest under sections 234A and 234B of Income Tax Act, 1961. ITA No. 8987/Del/2025 AY 2017-18 1. That the Appellant denies his liability to be assessed at total income of Rs. 1,90,000 /- as against the returned income of Rs NIL/- a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ase, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in not reversing the action of Ld. AO in charging interest under sections 234A and 234B of Income Tax Act, 1961. 15. The only issue raised through its legal ground of appeal number 02, by the assessee, in all the above appeals is regarding non-availability of any seized material with the Ld. AO which could have warranted a legal invocation of proceedings u/s. 153C of the Act. We have noted that facts of all the years are identical and hence we will consider the figures for AY 2014-15 qua ITA No. 8984/Del/2025. The decision taken therein shall apply mutatis mutandis in AYs 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18 as well. 16. The ld. Counsel for the assessee drew our attention to the satisfaction note drawn by the ld. AO dated 28.09.2021 placed in its paper book at page no. 8 to 23 for AYs 2010-11 to AY 2020-21. The ld. Counsel has vehemently argued that AYs 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17 and 2017-18 were completed/unabated assessment no addition was permissible to be made u/s. 153C of the Act unless some incriminating material concerning assessee was found during the course of search. The ld. Counsel submitted that perusal of the impugned satisfactio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d that the issue is now res-integra that completed assessments could not be disturbed in the assessment under section 153C in the absence of any incriminating documents. The ld. Counsel argued that a perusal of the satisfaction note and the assessment order under section 153C(supra) clearly shows that no incriminating documents was specifically seized as belonging to the assessee. It was argued that the seized material reproduced in the assessment order on pages 25, 31 to 33 alludes ledger accounts which contained disclosed entries and those which were duly accounted for in the books of accounts. 5. In support of her contentions, the ld. Counsel placed reliance upon the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in Abhisar Buildwell (454 ITR 212) holding that where no incriminating material found during search, no addition can be made in respect of completed assessment. Thus, it was held that "14. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, it is concluded as under: 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 assessmen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed by the High Court do not require any interference by this Court. Hence, all these appeals deserve to the dismissed and are accordingly dismissed." 7. Further, reliance was placed upon the decision of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v. Kabul Chawla 2015 SCC On Line Del 11555, holding that the information/material which has been relied upon for assessment has to relate with the assessee. "(iv) Although section 153A does not say that additions should be strictly made on the basis of evidence found in the course of the search, or other post-search material or information available with the Assessing Officer which can be related to the evidence found, it does not mean that the assessment "can be arbitrary or made without any relevance or nexus with the seized material. Obviously, an assessment has to be made under this section only on the basis of the seized material." 8. Per Contra, ld. DR placed reliance upon the orders of authorities below. 9. We have heard rival submissions in the light of materials placed on record. We have noted from the order of the ld. CIT(A) that the same concerns raised by the assessee have n....