2025 (1) TMI 1013 - SCH - Income Tax

Validity of Proceedings u/s 153C - issuance of the notice was preceded by the drawl of a Satisfaction Note by the jurisdictional AO - action u/s 153C for the six AYs - importance of material recovered in the course of a search or a requisition made and a right to reassess u/s 153A and 153C - usage of the expression have a bearing - As decided by HC 2024 (4) TMI 461 - DELHI HIGH COURT abatement of the six AYs or the relevant assessment year would follow the formation of that opinion and satisfaction in that respect being reached. We come to the firm conclusion that the incriminating material which is spoken of would have to be identified with respect to the AY to which it relates or may be likely to impact before the initiation of proceedings under Section 153C - The power to undertake such an assessment would stand confined to those years to which the material may relate or is likely to influence. Absent any material that may either cast a doubt on the estimation of total income for a particular year or years the AO would not be justified in invoking its powers conferred by Section 153C. It would only be consequent to such satisfaction being reached that a notice would be liable to be issued and thus resulting in the abatement of pending proceedings and reopening of concluded assessments. HELD THAT - There is a gross delay of 142 and 172 days respectively in filing the Special Leave Petitions which has not been satisfactorily explained by the petitioners. Even otherwise we see no reason to interfere with the impugned order passed by the High Court. Special Leave Petitions are accordingly dismissed on the ground of delay as well as merits.

Summary

The Supreme Court, presided over by Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan, addressed Special Leave Petitions filed by the Revenue. The Court noted a "gross delay of 142 and 172 days" in filing these petitions, which the petitioners failed to satisfactorily explain. Furthermore, the Court found "no reason to interfere with the impugned order passed by the High Court." Consequently, the Special Leave Petitions were dismissed "on the ground of delay as well as merits." Any pending applications were also disposed of.