TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (8) TMI 1265
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....DRP') dated 17.12.2022, passed under section 153A r.w.s 144C(13) r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the Assessment Year 2010-11. The word 'Act' herein this order would mean Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:- 1. Invalid Assumption of Jurisdiction under Section 153A 1.1 On the facts and in law, the Learned Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax ("Ld. AO") and the Hon'ble Dispute Resolution Panel ("Hon'ble DRP") have erred in invoking and sustaining proceedings under section 153A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in absence of satisfaction of the mandatory jurisdictional preconditions. 1.2 The assessment for the relevant assessment year was unabated as on the date of sear....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nsaction-wise details were provided in the show cause notices. 2.4 The Ld. the AO failed to provide item-wise and entry-wise working of the proposed additions, thereby preventing meaningful rebuttal. 2.5 The entire assessment is vitiated for non-compliance with audi alteram partem. 3 Unreasonable and Insufficient Opportunity of Hearing 3.1 The Ld. the AO granted only five working days for filing reply to the show-cause notice, contrary to CBDT's Standard Operating Procedure mandating a minimum of seven working days. 3.2 The assessment is therefore liable to be quashed for want of reasonable opportunity and violation of procedural safeguards. 4 Non-Speaking and Mechanical DRP Order The Ho....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Ojus Medicare. It was requested that consequently its legal grounds of appeal no.1 be adjudicated first in preference our other grounds of appeal. 4. The ld. Counsel submitted that the impugned assessment was completed/s 153A as a consequence to search u/s 132 of the Act on 30.06.2019. It was argued that by virtue of the search proceedings AY 2020-21 became the year of search to be counted as first year for calculation of block of 10 years. It was submitted that within the meanings of ratio laid down in the case of Ojus Medicare. 2024 (4) tmi 268, accordingly, AY 2010-11 assailed in the present appeal would become 11th year and hence barred by limitation. 5. The ld. CIT-DR, Shri Bhopal....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n Vikram Sujitkumar Bhatia. The submission of the respondents, therefore, that the block periods would have to be reckoned with reference to the date of search can neither be countenanced nor accepted. E. The reckoning of the six AYs' would require one to firstly identify the FY in which the search was undertaken and which would lead to the ascertainment of the AY relevant to the previous year of search. The block of six AYs' would consequently be those which immediately precede the AY relevant to the year of search. In the case of a search assessment undertaken in terms of Section 153C, the solitary distinction would be that the previous year of search would stand substituted by the date or the year in which the books, of ....