9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (4) TMI 571X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sed by the ld. AO on 18/12/2009. To our mind the ld. AO has completed the assessment and crossed his jurisdiction by way of involving himself into a reassessment proceedings rather than completing the assessment on seized material, if any, thereby making the entire proceedings as invalid and beyond the scope of sec. 153A of the Act. Following the jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Kabul Chawla [2015 (9) TMI 80 - DELHI HIGH COURT ] set aside the assessment made by the ld. AO u/s 153A of the Act. - Decided in favour of assessee - I.T.A .No.-3436/Del/2010 - - - Dated:- 24-2-2016 - SHRI N.K. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER For The Appellant : Shri Salil Aggarwal, Adv. For The Respond ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ential premises of Shri Anil Kumar Saha and Neeta Saha situated at 922, Sector 27, Noida and lockers in their names were also covered under this operation. Smt. Neeta Saha was assessed by Ward 46(1), New Delhi. Accordingly, punchnama files, photocopies of seized documents relating to assessee were transferred to the AO being ITO, Ward 46(1). Accordingly, notice u/s 153A was issued to the assessee. The assessee had filed her return of income on 26/07/2002 for the year under consideration declaring a total income of ₹ 1,65,215/-. On receipt of the notice u/s 153A the assessee filed her return of income on 18/12/2009 declaring the returned income. 2.2. During the year under consideration, the assessee has derived income from house pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aterial that was relied upon by the ld. AO to make the addition in the hands of the assessee. He relied upon the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Kabul Chawla reported in 380 ITR 573. 5. On the contrary the ld. DR submitted that, admittedly though there is no seized documents, the addition has been made based on the statement recorded u/s 132(4) of the Income Tax Act. 5.1 The ld. DR further submitted that the decision of CIT vs. Kabul Chawla (supra) is distinguishable to the facts of the present case. He submitted that the Hon ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Kabul Chawla holds that an assessment u/s 153A would be valid if there is an incriminating material that has been unearthed during the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it is observed that the ld. AO had not seized any documents/incriminating material, to substantiate the addition made. The addition was based on the income declared in the return of income filed u/s 153A which is very clear from the questionnaire raised by the ld. AO on 18/12/2009. 7.2.To our mind the ld. AO has completed the assessment and crossed his jurisdiction by way of involving himself into a reassessment proceedings rather than completing the assessment on seized material, if any, thereby making the entire proceedings as invalid and beyond the scope of sec. 153A of the Act. 8. We, therefore, following the jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Kabul Chawla set aside the assessment made by the ld. AO u/s 153A of the A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
