9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (10) TMI 1006 - HC - Income TaxAssumption of jurisdiction u/s 153A - ITAT held the assumption of jurisdiction u/s 153A as erroneous inasmuch as the material seized during the search was not incriminating - Held that - ITAT has come to the above conclusion by relying on the decision of this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Kabul Chawla 2015 (9) TMI 80 - DELHI HIGH COURT . The ITAT has, in the impugned order, discussed in detail the materials seized during the course of search and has concluded that it was not incriminating. Having been shown the same material by the learned counsel for the Revenue, the Court too is unable to come to a different conclusion. No substantial question of law arises
Issues: Jurisdiction under Section 153 A of the Income Tax Act, 1961
Analysis: 1. Delay in filing appeal: The Court allowed the application for condonation of delay of 12 days in filing the appeal, citing reasons stated therein. The delay was condoned, and the application was allowed subject to all just exceptions. 2. Appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act: The appeal was directed against the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) for the Assessment Year 2008-09. The main issue raised by the Revenue was whether the ITAT erred in holding that the assumption of jurisdiction under Section 153 A of the Act was erroneous due to the non-incriminating nature of the seized material. The ITAT based its decision on a previous court ruling and detailed discussion of the seized materials, ultimately concluding that they were not incriminating. 3. Evaluation of seized materials: The Court, after reviewing the materials shown by the Revenue's counsel, agreed with the ITAT's conclusion that the seized materials were not incriminating. Consequently, the Court found no substantial question of law arising from the ITAT's order and dismissed the appeal. 4. Conclusion: The High Court, after considering the arguments and the materials seized during the search, upheld the ITAT's decision regarding the non-incriminating nature of the seized materials. As a result, the appeal was dismissed, and the decision of the ITAT was affirmed.
|
