9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (11) TMI 1228X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... zation, in our consider view the order under challenge does not suffer from any perversity, illegality or impropriety, hence, does not require any interference and liable to be affirmed. Consequently the appeal filed by the Revenue Department is liable to be dismissed. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue Department stands dismissed. - ITA Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85(Asr)/2019, ITA Nos.86, 87, 88, 89 & 90(Asr)/2019, ITA Nos.92, 93, 94 & 95(Asr)/2019 - - - Dated:- 29-10-2019 - Sh. B.R. Baskaran, Accountant Member And Sh. N.K. Choudhry, Judicial Member For the Appellant : Sh. Sandeep Chauhan (Ld. CIT-DR) For the Respondent : Sh. Surinder Mahajan (Ld. CA) ORDER PER N.K. CHOUDHRY, JM: All these appeals have been preferred by the assessees against the separate orders detailed below, impugned herein passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-5, Ludhiana u/s 250(6) of the Act, 1961 (hereinafter called as the Act ). Sl. No. Appeal Number Assessment Year Date of CIT(A) order Off ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ITA No.94/Asr/2019 (A.Y.2013-14) 12/11/2018 CIT(A)-5, Ludhiana 14. ITA No.95/Asr/2019 (A.Y.2014-15) 12/11/2018 CIT(A)-5, Ludhiana 2. At the outset, it was observed that in all appeals, the issues are identical and therefore for the sake of brevity all appeals have been taken simultaneously for adjudication and the facts of ITA No.81/2019 have been taken into consideration and result of the same should also apply mutatis mutandis to other appeals under consideration. 3. Brief facts of the case are that a search and seizure operation u/s 132(1) of the Act was conducted on 24.07.2014 at the business/residential premises belonging to Nature Group, Abhor, Fazilka. Accordingly proceedings u/s 153A of the Act were initiated, however, later on the same have been dropped on dated 07.11.2016 on revealing by the Assessing Officer that search warrant u/s 132 was not issued in the name of the assessee during the course of search operation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... O in the assessment order), has been filed by the assessee. It is also argued that no notice u/s 143(2) was issued and served upon the assessee. As per the AR, the assessment has been framed on the basis of non-est return. In the remand report, the AO has not stated anything about the filing of return, however it is mentioned that notice u/s 143(2) was duly served upon the assessee through the Speed-Post. A perusal of the assessment record shows that notice u/s 143(2) was issued vide no. 330 dated 23.11.20.16 and copy of the same is available on the assessment records. However, the report of the AO, submitted during the appellate proceedings, is silent about the return mentioned in the assessment order to have been filed by the assessee on 17.11.2016. The assessment record shows that returns were filed by the assessee u/s 139 and after the issue of initial notice u/s 153A, the assessee had submitted that the same may be treated in response to notice u/s 153A also. However, the proceedings initiated u/s 153A were dropped on 07.11.2016 and thereafter proceedings u/s 153C were initiated. In the remand report, the AO has not been able to rebut the claim of the appell ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s 132, the proceedings initiated u/s 153A of the Act have been dropped on dated 07.11.2016, however considering the facts that during the course of search and seizure operation certain documents and diaries were found and seized from the residence of Sh. Satpal Thathai, in which some of the entries pertaining to the assessee were found, the proceedings u/s 153C were initiated after recording the satisfaction notice u/s 153C was issued on 07.11.2016 and served upon the assessee in response to which the assessee on dated 17.11.2016 had filed his return of income declaring an income of ₹ 1,33,400/-. Proceedings u/s 153A of the Act finally culminated into framing the assessment u/s 153C r.w. section 143(3) of the Act and on appeal, the same stands quashed by the Ld CIT(A). 5.1 The Revenue Department raised the issues that the Ld. CIT(A) misdirected himself in holding that since there was no return in response to notice u/s 153C, notice under Provisions of Section 143(2) could not have been issued, which vitiated the assessment order u/s 153C, particularly when assumption of jurisdiction u/s 153C was held to be valid after proceedings u/s 153A was droppe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3) is not valid as per law. In the absence of valid return, in response to notice u/s 153C, the assessment was to be framed as per the procedure prescribed u/s 144, but this has not been followed by the AO in this case. The Ld. CIT(A) finally concluded that the argument of the AR on this issue have merits that the assessment order dated 31.12.2016 is invalid being void ab initio . Therefore, the assessment framed u/s 153C r.w.Sec.143(3) is illegal and bad in law. 5.3 The issue involved in the instant case relates to the passing of the assessment order u/s 153(C) r.w.s 143(3) of the Act in the absence of return. Though, the Assessing Officer in the assessment order categorically observed that the proceedings u/s 153C were initiated after recording the satisfaction of the undersigned (Assessing Officer) and notice u/s 153C was issued on 7.11.2016, in response to which the assessee had filed its return of income on 17.11.2016 by declaring an income of ₹ 1,33,400/-, however, in remand report filed before the Ld. CIT(A), the Assessing Officer failed to rebut the claim of the appellant/assessee that no return of income as observed in the assessment orde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
