2025 (4) TMI 209 - AT - Income Tax

Reopening of assessment u/s 147 - material seized by the investigation wing during the course of search u/s 132(1) of the Act in case of Mukesh Banka and his related companies which revealed that assessee was one of the beneficiary of accommodation entry in the form of unsecured loan - applicability of Sections 147 148 and 153C - HELD THAT - We find merit in the contention of AR that where there is a specific provisions existing in the Act overriding all the provisions then the proceeding should be initiated and culminated in consonance with those specific provisions. In this case the information was found during the course of search u/s 132 on Mukesh Bunka and his group concerns relating to the assessee and therefore the special provisions as contained in the provisions of Section 153C should have been invoked. We have carefully perused the provisions of Section 153C of the Act and find that the said provisions begin with the non-obstante clause overriding all other provisions and consequently proceeding should be initiated u/s 153C of the Act after following the procedure laid down in the section itself. Therefore it is not open to the department to resort to the provisions of Section 147 read with section 148 of the Act to assess the escaped income which has come to the notice of the department during the course of search u/s 132(1) on some other person. The case of the assessee find force from the decision of Sejal Jewellary and Anr. Vs. Union Ors and Others 2025 (2) TMI 870 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT We are inclined to quash the proceeding-initiated u/s 147 of the Act and consequent order framed by the ld. AO. The appeal of the assessee is allowed on legal issue.

1. ISSUES PRESENTED and CONSIDERED

The primary legal question considered in this judgment was whether the reopening of the assessment under Section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, was valid when the information leading to the reopening was derived from a search action under Section 132. This issue involves the applicability of Sections 147, 148, and 153C of the Act.

2. ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSIS

The core issue revolves around the validity of the assessment reopening under Section 147 based on information obtained during a search under Section 132, which the assessee argued should have been conducted under Section 153C.

- Relevant legal framework and precedents:

The legal framework involves Sections 147, 148, and 153C of the Income-tax Act. Section 147 deals with income escaping assessment, allowing the Assessing Officer (AO) to reassess income if it has escaped assessment. Section 153C pertains to the assessment of income of any other person when documents or assets seized during a search pertain to them. The non-obstante clause in Section 153C suggests it overrides Sections 147 and 148 when applicable.

Precedents cited include decisions from the Bombay High Court in Sejal Jewellary and Anr. v. Union & Ors, the Rajasthan High Court in Shyam Sunder Khandelwal v. ACIT, and the Karnataka High Court in Sri Dinakara Suvarna v. DCIT. These cases emphasized the necessity of applying Section 153C when information is derived from a search.

- Court's interpretation and reasoning:

The Tribunal found that the information leading to the reopening of the assessment was derived from a search under Section 132. It emphasized that when specific provisions like Section 153C exist, they should be invoked instead of general provisions like Section 147. The Tribunal highlighted that Section 153C begins with a non-obstante clause, indicating its precedence over Sections 147 and 148.

- Key evidence and findings:

The key evidence was the information obtained during a search on the Banka Group, revealing that the assessee was a beneficiary of accommodation entries through a shell company. This information was used to reopen the assessment under Section 147, which the Tribunal found inappropriate given the existence of Section 153C.

- Application of law to facts:

The Tribunal applied the law by determining that the information used to reopen the assessment was obtained from a search, thus necessitating the use of Section 153C. It concluded that the AO should have followed the procedure under Section 153C, which is specifically designed for such situations.

- Treatment of competing arguments:

The assessee argued that the reopening under Section 147 was invalid due to the applicability of Section 153C. The Department contended that the information was credible and justified the reopening under Section 147. The Tribunal sided with the assessee, emphasizing the precedence of Section 153C in cases involving search-derived information.

- Conclusions:

The Tribunal concluded that the reopening of the assessment under Section 147 was invalid and void ab initio. It quashed the proceedings initiated under Section 147 and the consequent order framed by the AO.

3. SIGNIFICANT HOLDINGS

- Preserve verbatim quotes of crucial legal reasoning:

"It is not open to the department to resort to the provisions of Section 147 read with section 148 of the Act to assess the escaped income which has come to the notice of the department during the course of search u/s 132(1) on some other person."

- Core principles established:

The judgment reinforces the principle that when information leading to an assessment is derived from a search, the specific provisions of Section 153C should be invoked instead of the general provisions of Section 147. The non-obstante clause in Section 153C indicates its precedence over Sections 147 and 148.

- Final determinations on each issue:

The Tribunal determined that the reopening of the assessment under Section 147 was invalid due to the applicability of Section 153C. The appeal of the assessee was allowed on this legal issue, and the proceedings initiated under Section 147 were quashed.

← Previous Next →