9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (5) TMI 1372 - AT - Income TaxLegality of notice under section 153C - whether the satisfaction note as prepared by the Assessing Officer of the searched person in the present case is as per law or not? - Held that - There is nothing coming out of the satisfaction note that the seized documents belong to the assessee. Further, there is nothing which would indicate as to how the presumption which was to be raised against the person searched have been rebutted by the Assessing Officer. The satisfaction note does not at all display the reason or basis for the conclusion that the Assessing Officer is satisfied that these documents belong to the assessee. The the ingredients of section 153C of the Act have been satisfied in the present case. - Decided in favour of assessee.
Issues Involved:
1. Legality of the notice issued under section 153C of the Income Tax Act. 2. Merits of the assessment made on the income of the assessee. 3. Grounds raised by the Department in their appeal. Issue-wise Detailed Analysis: 1. Legality of the Notice Issued under Section 153C: The primary issue revolves around the legality of the notice issued under section 153C of the Income Tax Act. The assessee contended that the notice was invalid as the satisfaction recorded by the Assessing Officer did not conclusively prove that the seized documents belonged to the assessee. The satisfaction note merely referred to property transactions involving the assessee without establishing ownership of the documents. The Tribunal examined the satisfaction note and observed that it did not indicate any material found during the search that belonged to the assessee. The note only mentioned that the documents contained details of transactions made by the assessee, which needed verification. The Tribunal relied on the judgment of the Delhi High Court in Pepsi Foods Pvt. Ltd. and Pepsico India Holdings Pvt. Ltd., which emphasized that the Assessing Officer must conclusively establish that the seized documents belong to a person other than the one searched. The Tribunal concluded that the satisfaction note did not meet the legal requirements, and therefore, the notice under section 153C was not as per law. Consequently, the assessment framed based on this notice was quashed. 2. Merits of the Assessment Made on the Income of the Assessee: Since the Tribunal quashed the order of the Assessing Officer on the ground of the invalid notice under section 153C, the merits of the assessment made on the income of the assessee became irrelevant. The Tribunal did not need to adjudicate on the other grounds raised by the assessee regarding the merits of the case. 3. Grounds Raised by the Department in Their Appeal: The Department's appeal was contingent on the validity of the notice under section 153C. As the Tribunal quashed the order of the Assessing Officer due to the invalid notice, the grounds raised by the Department in their appeal did not require adjudication. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal of the Department. Conclusion: In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, quashing the assessment order due to the invalidity of the notice under section 153C. Consequently, the appeal of the Department was dismissed. The Tribunal emphasized the necessity for the Assessing Officer to conclusively establish that the seized documents belong to a person other than the one searched, as per the legal requirements laid down in the relevant judgments.
|
