9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2025 (1) TMI 1228 - AT - Income TaxValidity of assessment order u/s 153C as barred by limitation - As argued assessing officer has not passed the order u/s 153C in case of all these assessees within the time limit prescribed u/s 153B - HELD THAT - The assessment should be completed within 9 months or 21 months whichever is later. Therefore taking the lead case for AY 2016-27 we note that assessment order was passed by the assessing officer under section 153C read with section 143(3) of the Act on 21.04.2021. The assessment order ought have been passed on 31.12.2020. Therefore number of days of delay in passing the assessment order comes at 111 days. Assessment order ought to have been passed on (A) or (B) whichever is later that is on 31.12.2020. However actual date of passing the assessment order in the assessee s case is on 21.04.2021 hence assessment order passed by the assessing officer under section 153C read with section 143(3) dated 21.04.2021 is barred by limitation by 111 days therefore the assessment order should be quashed on this fact only. Law is well settled that when the statute requires to do certain thing in certain way the thing must be done in that way or not at all. Other methods or mode of performance are impliedly and necessarily forbidden. The aforesaid settled legal proposition is based on a legal maxim Expressio unius est exclusion alteris meaning there by that if a statute provides for a thing to be done in a particular manner then it has to be done in that manner and in no other manner and following of other course is not permissible. Thus as the assessment order was not framed within the time limit prescribed u/s 153B therefore assessment order passed by the assessment officer u/s 153C r/w section 143(3) of the Act is here by quashed and consequently we allow the appeal of the assessee.
1. ISSUES PRESENTED and CONSIDERED
The core legal issues considered in this judgment include: - Whether the assessment order under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act was barred by limitation as prescribed under Section 153B of the Act. - Whether the assessment order was valid given the alleged procedural lapses regarding the service of notice. - Whether the additional income disclosed by the assessee should be taxed at a special rate under Section 115BBE of the Act. - The validity of the condonation of delay in filing the appeals. 2. ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSIS Assessment Order Barred by Limitation: - Legal Framework: Section 153B of the Income Tax Act prescribes the time limit for completing assessments under Section 153C. The relevant provisions state that the assessment should be completed within 21 months from the end of the financial year in which the last of the authorizations for search was executed or within nine months from the end of the financial year in which the seized documents were handed over, whichever is later. - Court's Interpretation: The Tribunal noted that the assessment order was passed 111 days beyond the prescribed time limit, thus rendering it barred by limitation. - Application of Law to Facts: The Tribunal examined the dates of the search authorization and the handing over of documents to determine the applicable time limit. It concluded that the assessment order should have been completed by 31.12.2020, but was instead passed on 21.04.2021. - Conclusion: The assessment order was quashed as it was barred by limitation, violating the procedural requirements under Section 153B. Service of Notice and Procedural Validity: - Legal Framework: The service of notice is a crucial procedural step in the assessment process, ensuring the assessee is informed and can respond appropriately. - Key Evidence and Findings: The Tribunal found that the notice was not served on the registered email address of the assessee but on an old email address, leading to a delay in filing appeals. - Conclusion: The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals, considering the procedural lapse in serving the notice. Taxation at Special Rate under Section 115BBE: - Legal Framework: Section 115BBE imposes a special tax rate on unexplained income under Sections 68, 69, 69A, 69B, 69C, or 69D. - Court's Interpretation: The Tribunal upheld the application of Section 115BBE, noting that the income was unexplained and not disclosed in the original return. - Conclusion: The Tribunal agreed with the lower authorities that the additional income should be taxed at the special rate under Section 115BBE. 3. SIGNIFICANT HOLDINGS - The Tribunal held that the assessment orders were barred by limitation and thus quashed them. - It emphasized the importance of adhering to statutory time limits for assessments, reinforcing the principle that procedural compliance is essential for the validity of tax assessments. - The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals, recognizing the procedural errors in serving the notice. - The Tribunal's decision to quash the assessment orders rendered other issues on the merits of the additions academic and infructuous. - The Tribunal applied its decision uniformly across all related appeals, given the identical facts and issues involved.
|
