9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 1225X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ER AND SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Appellant by : Shri Dhirendra Trivedi Respondent by : Shri Jagdish Shah, CIT-DR ORDER PER RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER: The assessee is in appeal before us against order of the ld.CIT(A)- IV, Ahmedabad dated 24.11.2011 passed for the Asstt.Year 2004-05. 2. The assessee has taken six grounds of appeal, but its grievance revolves around two issues, whereby, it has pleaded that the ld.AO has erred in taking cognizance of section 153C by ignoring that no satisfaction was recorded by the AO of the searched persons authorizing the AO of the assessee to issue notice under section 153C. In its second fold of grievance, the assessee has pleaded that the ld.CIT(A) has err ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... exhibiting the escapement of income in the hands of the assessee was found and the AO of the searched person has recorded a satisfaction for taking action against the assessee. He, therefore, issued a notice under section 153C of the Act. In response to the notice, the assessee has contended that the return filed on 1.1.2004 declaring income at ₹ 5,41,320/- be treated as filed in response to the notice issued under section 153C. In other words, the assessee has submitted return on 29.12.2006 declaring the same income which was returned under section 139(1) of the Act. The ld.AO has passed the assessment order on 16.12.2010 and determined the taxable income of the assessee for the Asstt.Year 2004-05 at ₹ 13,64,620/-. 5. Appea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... id Act and delivered at my office as mentioned above within forty five days from the service of this notice. Sd/- (ILA PARMAR) Asstt. Commissioner of Income tax, Central Circle 2, Baroda 7. We find that identical satisfaction note recorded in the case of other assessees was considered by the ITAT along with IT(SS)A.No.68/Ahd/2012 and others. The Tribunal has reproduced the satisfaction note. The finding of the Tribunal on this issue reads as under: NOTICE UNDER SECTION 153 r.w.s. 153a OF THE INCOMETAX ACT, 1961 Date : 29.08.2008 PAN : AACFP 3995 R AY 2003-04 To M/s. Parshwa Corporation Jaldhara Apartment Opp. Maha Gujarat Hospital, College Road, Nadiad A search u/s 132 of the Income-tax Act was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce u/s 153C is totally vague. It has not specified which valuable articles/things/books of accounts/documents were found from Shri Rameshbhai B. Shah which belongs to the assessee. In the assessment order the Assessing Officer has mentioned that in the laptop of Shri Rameshbhai B. Shah the data pertaining to the assessee were found and on that basis notices u/s 153C have been issued. However, in the notice u/s 153C, wherein the Assessing Officer is claimed to have been recorded the satisfaction for issue of the notice, there is no mention about such laptop or the alleged data in such laptop which is claimed to be belonged to the assessee. In view of above, we have no hesitation to hold that the basic condition for issue of notice u/s 153C h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er of such other person. Therefore, in the absence of satisfaction by the Assessing Officer of the person searched, the Assessing Officer of the present assessee does not get any jurisdiction to issue such notice. Accordingly, notice u/s 153C issued by the Assessing Officer of the person searched lacks jurisdiction which is not curable by virtue of provision of Section 292B. In view of above, we respectfully following the decision of Hon ble Apex Court in the case of Manish Maheshwari (supra) and decision of Hon ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Lalitkumar M. Patel (supra), hold that the notices issued u/s 153C were invalid; accordingly the same are quashed. Consequently, the assessment orders framed u/s 153C r.w.s. 153A are also ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
