2017 (1) TMI 1634 - AT - Income Tax

Assessment u/s 153C - non recording of satisfaction before transmitting the record to the other Assessing Officer who has jurisdiction over the person u/s 153C - Held that - There was no reference of any material in the assessment order completed u/s 153C and even no reference of persons wherefrom the alleged papers were found. Therefore, there was no incriminating material or document. Therefore, the assessment order passed u/s 143(3)read with section 153C is not as per law. During the course of hearing, the learned DR was specifically asked to produce the satisfaction regarding search party as to whether the Assessing Officer who has made the search has recorded any satisfaction before transmitting the record to the other Assessing Officer who has jurisdiction over the person u/s 153C of the Act. AO who has made the assessment order has recorded satisfaction, but the Assessing Officer who has searched, has not recorded any satisfaction, therefore, as per the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court and as per the CBDT Circular No. 24/2014 dated 31st December, 2015 as pending litigation with regard to recording of satisfaction note under section 158BD/153C should be withdrawn/not pressed if it does not meet the guidelines laid down by the Apex Court. - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Validity of notice u/s 153C of the Act without recorded satisfaction by the search party.
2. Treatment of unsecured loans as income due to lack of proof of genuineness.

Issue 1: Validity of notice u/s 153C of the Act without recorded satisfaction by the search party

The appeal was filed against the order of the CIT(A)-I, Indore, where the Assessing Officer treated the investment in property as income and unsecured loans as the assessee's income for the assessment year 2007-08. The main contention raised was the absence of recorded satisfaction by the search party before issuing the notice u/s 153C. The CBDT Circular No. 24/15 clarified the requirement of satisfaction for sections 158BD/BC of the Act to avoid litigation. The assessee emphasized the importance of recording satisfaction before transmitting records to the Assessing Officer with jurisdiction over the assessee. Despite multiple adjournments, the satisfaction was not provided by the Department. Citing legal precedents, including the decision in Anand Steel and Calcutta Knitwears case, the Tribunal held that without recorded satisfaction, the appeal must be allowed.

Issue 2: Treatment of unsecured loans as income due to lack of proof of genuineness

The Assessing Officer found discrepancies in the unsecured loans received by the assessee, questioning the genuineness of the transactions. During inquiries, it was revealed that the assessee had availed loans without providing any security, raising doubts about the authenticity of the transactions. Statements from involved parties indicated discrepancies in the loan transactions. The Assessing Officer concluded that the assessee failed to prove the genuineness of the loans, treating the investment in property and loans as income. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal. However, the Tribunal, after analyzing the facts and legal aspects, found that there was no incriminating material or documents related to the assessment under appeal. As per legal requirements and precedents, the Tribunal held the assessment order under section 153C of the Act was not in accordance with the law. Relying on previous decisions and CBDT Circulars, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, emphasizing the necessity of recorded satisfaction by the search party before treating investments and loans as income.

In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal on the basis of the absence of recorded satisfaction by the search party before issuing the notice u/s 153C. The treatment of unsecured loans as income was also overturned due to lack of proof of genuineness. The judgment highlighted the importance of complying with legal requirements and precedents to ensure fair assessments and avoid unnecessary litigation.