TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (8) TMI 1038
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sequently, a search and seizure action u/s. 132 of the Act was carried out in the case of Corporate International Financial Services Ltd. (CIFSL) and others on 10.10.2018. The Assessing Officer of CIFSL during the course of assessments proceedings noticed that certain incriminating documents found and seized which pertains to the assessee. No search was conducted on the Assessee. The Assessing Officer after going through the contents of incriminating documents recorded satisfaction. Subsequently the papers were transferred to the Assessing Officer of assessee and Assessing Officer of assessee recorded satisfaction as required under section 153C of the Act for initiation of assessment proceedings vide satisfaction note dated 10th June 2021 which is enclosed at Assesses paper Book page no. 11-12. The Assessing Officer of the assessee i.e. ACIT Central Circle 4 New Delhi after recording of satisfaction note issued notice under Section 153C of the Act dated 13th July 2021. The assessee filed return of income in response to notice under section 153C of the Act on 7.5.2022. According to the Ld. Counsel for the Assessee in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of C....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... capacity in the case of other person other than the searched person. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Jasjit Singh held that searched in the other person other than the searched person is to be considered to have been initiated when the seized material was handed over to the assessee's AO and satisfaction note was not drawn. Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of CIT vs. Jasjit Singh (supra) observed as under:- "9. It is evident on a plain interpretation of Section 153C(1) that the Parliamentary intent to enact the proviso was to cater not merely to the question of abatement but also with regard to the date from which the six year period was to be reckoned, in respect of which the returns were to be filed by the third party (whose premises are not searched and in respect of whom the specific provision under section 153C was enacted. The revenue argued that the proviso [to Section 153(c)(1)] is confined in its application to the question of abatement. 10. This Court is of the opinion that the revenue's argument is insubstantial and without merit. It is quite plausible that without the kind of interpretation which SSP Aviation adopted, the AO....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....search was subsequent to 1.4.2021, for which, the provisions of section 153C will not apply. Therefore, the impugned notices dated 7.2.2023 is unsustainable and the same were issued without authority and against the provisions of sub-section (3) of Section 153C of the Act. 50. In such view of the matter, all the impugned notices are liable be quashed and accordingly, all the impugned notices dated 7.2.2023 issued by the 2nd respondent are quashed." 7. As the issues are covered, in the present case notice under section 153C of the Act dated 13th July 2021 is without jurisdiction and hence quashed and its consequent assessment is also quashed. As regards other pleadings are concerned the same have become academic. 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. ITA NO. 2777/DEL/2026 (AY 2017-18) 9. The first jurisdiction issue raised by the assessee in this appeal is as regards to order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) confirming the action of the Additional CIT levied penalty and passed the impugned penalty order despite the fact that the penalty became time barred. For this, assessee has raised following ground no. 3:- "3. That havin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....making reference for imposition of penalty u/s. 271D of the Act vide letter F.No. DCIT/CC-04/2022- 23/1203 dated 26.3.2026 wherein, it is stated that "in respect to the above mentioned subject kindly refer to para 4.11 of the assessment order u/s. 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) dated 25.3.2023 passed in the case of the assessee. Vide para 4.12 of the assessment order, it is established that the assessee has accepted sum of Rs. 10617500/- in cash in contravention of the section 269SS of the Act. As per provisions of section 271D of the Act, the assessee is liable for penalty for failure to comply with the provisions of section 269SS of the Act. Further, it is provided in section 271D(2) that any penalty u/s. 271D(1) of the Act shall be imposed by the Joint/Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax. Therefore, in consequence of observation made in par 4.8 and 4.11 of the assessment order, the case is being referred to the office of your goodself for necessary action as provided in section 271D of the Act. The relevant provision of section 275(1)(c) read as under:- "275(1(c) ..in any other case, after the expiry of the financial year in which the....