-
Q. What will happen when the revenue seized a documents, which is computer generated loose sheet and found during the search of third party who is neither assessee nor any authorized person of the assessee. The HIGH COURT OF DELHI in the case of PCIT vs. STC DEVELOPER PVT. LTD. Decided on Dec 15, 2021 on similar issue. Section 153C. Search & Seizure.
-
Incriminating material of the assessee found in the search of 3rd party then the assessment or reassessment proceeding of the assessee under which section 148 or 153C of the Income Tax Act? ITAT Delhi Bench again confirmed on Sep 17, 2021. in the case of CITY LIFE PROJECTS PVT. LTD. vs. ITO
-
Question: Q.The search in the premises of the assessees is on the basis of warrant issued in the name of B. The AO without applying his mind consciously and mandatorily had not stated in the satisfaction note that the seized documents belong to “other person” i.e; the assessee. The question is that without recording such a satisfaction can AO initiate proceedings against the “other persons i.e; the assessee” u/s 153C of the Act. ITAT Banglore Bench passed the order on Jul 30, 2021 in the case of ARSHAD ISPAT & ANR. vs. DCIT. Section 139, 147, 148, 149, 151, 153C
-
Section 153A, 153C, 132(4). If no incriminating material is found during search, no addition could be made in respect of the assessments that had become final. Statements recorded under Section 132(4) of the Act do not by themselves constitute incriminating material. PCIT Vs. ANAND KUMAR JAIN (HUF) & ORS. HIGH COURT OF DELHI on Feb 12, 2021. If any statement was to be construed as an incriminating material belonging to or pertaining to a person other than person searched (as referred to in Section 153A), then the only legal recourse available to the department was to proceed in terms of Section 153C of the Act by handing over the same to the AO who has jurisdiction over such person.
-
Friends this case is belonging to Section 132, 143(1), 153A(1) and 153C. ITAT DELHI on Jun 30, 2020 on the issue of determining the six assessment years prior to the date of search. Facts in brief are that the document of the assessee was found during search operation on dated 9.10.2014 at the premises of Shri Mulchand Malu and Shri Vikas Malu and therefore the assessee was the “other person” to be assessed u/s 153C. Further there was undisputed facts that the documents etc., were handed-over to the A.O. of the assessee was in the month of September, 2016. It was held that therefore the six assessment years prior to the date of search in the case of the assessee is A.Ys. 2011-2012 to 2016-2017. Therefore, there is no jurisdiction with the A.O. to pass assessment order for the assessment year 2009-10 and the same was held to be without jurisdiction, void abinitio and was quashed. ACIT vs. KUBER PRODUCTS PVT. LTD. AY 2009-2010. In favour of the assessee
-
Section 153C: Delhi High Court on 09.08.2019 held that since the search took place and Notice under Section 153C prior to 1st June, 2015 and, therefore, Section 153C of the Act as it stood at the relevant time applied. Therefore, the onus was on the Revenue to show that the incriminating material/documents recovered at the time of search belongs’ to the Assessee. In other words, it is not enough for the Revenue to show that the documents either pertain’ to the Assessee or contains information that relates to’ the Assessee. Further the licence issued to the Assessee by the DTCP and the letter issued by the DTCP permitting it to transfer such licence are not incriminating material and therefore jurisdiction can not be assumed by the AO under Section 153C of the Act. PCIT vs M/S. Dreamcity Buildwell Pvt.
-
Section 153C- Supreme Court of India on on 5 March, 2020 Before issuing notice under Section 153C of the Act, the Assessing Officer of the searched person must be “satisfied” that, inter alia, any document seized or requisitioned “belongs to” a person other than the searched person. If the satisfaction note recorded under Section 153C of the Act in respect of the assessee, i.e., a third party, hold invalid entire proceedings taken there under is null and void. However, in the case where the Assessing Officer of the searched person and the other person is the same, it is sufficient by the Assessing Officer to note in the satisfaction note that the documents seized from the searched person belonged to the other person i.e; the assessee. In the case of M/S. Super Malls Private Limited. vs PCIT. AY 2008-09
-
Section 68, 133(6), 143(1), 147, 153C किसी अन्य पार्टी के यहां आयकर छापा पड़ने पर एसएससी के इनक्रिमिनेटिंग मटेरियल मिलने पर धारा 153C की प्रोसीडिंग्स होगी। अगर धारा 147 148 की प्रोसिडिंग की जाती है तो वह नोटिस एवं प्रोसीडिंग्स इल्लीगल है तथा सारी प्रोसिडिंग रद्द करने योग्य है। NAWAL OILS AND CONTAINERS P. LTD. vs. ITO
-
The proceedings u/s 153C could be initiated against a party only if the document seized during the search and seizure proceedings of another person belonging to the assessee concerned.
-
any addition u/s 153A can be made only on the basis of incriminating material found during course of search.No addition can be made on the basis of papers / information submitted during proceedings. D ART FURNITURE SYSTEMS P. LTD. vs. DCIT