9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (5) TMI 362X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at a satisfaction that the seized material pertains to other persons, namely, persons other than the searched party. It is only then the persons other than the searched parties can be proceeded against. There is nothing in the assessment order which would indicate that the assessment officer arrived at such satisfaction. The Tribunal noted that it has allowed this additional ground to be raised after hearing the departmental representatives' objection. To do complete justice and to both sides the Tribunal gave enough opportunity to the Revenue to produce the files and if the same contain the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer, then, to rely upon it before the Tribunal. The Tribunal noted that more than 20 months passed after the firs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o the search and seizure action under section 132 (1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, carried out in the case of M/s. Ingram Micro (India) Exports Pte. Ltd. / M/s. Tech Pacific (India) Ltd. at their business premises revealed that these two companies are not paying any income tax in India though they are having permanent establishment through M/s. Ingram Micro (India) Pte. Ltd. / M/s. Tech Pacific (India) Ltd. Therefore, proceedings were required to be initiated in this case to bring to tax the profits of these two entities. Subsequently, notices under section 153-C were issued for all these years. The assessee filed returns of income declaring Nil income. The assessments were completed by the Assessing Officer on 29th September, 2010. The ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or all these reasons, he would submit that the present appeals do not raise any substantial questions of law. 4. After hearing both sides and perusing the relevant material including the impugned orders, we are of the view that there is much substance in the contention of Mr. Mistri. The additional ground was permitted and with regard to the validity of the proceedings under section 153-C as the Tribunal concluded that this issue or question goes to the root of the case. If it is answered either way, the matter would come to an end. The Tribunal has noted that the additional ground is the legal ground going to the root of the case. The Assessing Officer did not allow inspection of the record to the assessee or its counsel and that is why ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the proceedings under section 153-C was not available. The record in that behalf was not produced. In these circumstances, not only did the Tribunal find that it was necessary and in the interest of justice to permit raising of an additional ground, but to answer it. It is only to enable it to answer it that it relied on the settled principles and the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Manish Maheshwari vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (2007) 289 ITR 341. It is only to enable the Tribunal to refer to the settled principles and for re-enforcing its conclusion that this judgment is referred. 5. We do not find any wider or broader question being decided or answered. It there is a satisfaction required and to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
