9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (6) TMI 598X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not based on any incriminating/seized materials found during search and seizure operation. That being the factual position emerging on record, the ratio laid down in case of PCIT Vs. Abhisar Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. [ 2023 (5) TMI 587 - SUPREME COURT] would squarely apply. Pertinently, while considering identical nature of dispute in case of assessee s group concern arising out of the same search and seizure operation, the Coordinate Bench in case of M/s. Frontier Commercial Co. Ltd. [ 2023 (7) TMI 1160 - ITAT DELHI] has deleted the additions, as, they were not based on any seized/incriminating materials found as a result of search and seizure operation. Thus, we are of the view that the disputed additions having been made without reference to any seized/incriminating material found as a result of search and seizure operation, are unsustainable. Appeal of assessee allowed. - Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice-President And Shri Naveen Chandra, Accountant Member For the Assessee : Sh. Somil Agrawal, Advocate, Sh. Deepesh Garg, Advocate For the Department : Sh. T. James Singson, CIT(DR) ORDER PER BENCH Captioned appeals by the assessee arise out of a common order dated 30.01.2018 of learned Commis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee preferred appeals before learned first appellate authority, inter alia, on the ground that additions having been made without any incriminating materials, are unsustainable. The first appellate authority, however, did not find merit in the submissions of the assessee. He observed that as per the remand report of the Assessing Officer, the additions made in the assessment years were based on seized materials. Thus, ultimately, he sustained the additions made by the Assessing Officer. 5. Before us, learned counsel appearing for the assessee reiterated the stand taken before the departmental authorities. He submitted, as far as assessment year 2008-09 is concerned, in terms with proviso to section 153C of the Act, it falls beyond the block of six years, hence, the Assessing Officer could not have proceeded to frame the assessment under section 153C of the Act. In support of such proposition, he relied upon the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in case of CIT Vs. Jasjit Singh, 458 ITR 437 (SC). Without prejudice, he submitted that none of the additions made by the Assessing Officer are based on any incriminating material found as a result of search and seizure operation. 6 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rned Departmental Representative was not in a position to establish on record that any search and seizure operation under section 132 of the Act was carried out on the assessee. On scanning through two paper-books submitted by the Revenue on 17.11.2021 and 31.01.2022, we have not found any search and seizure warrant or panchnama drawn up in the name of the assessee. What the paper-book filed on 31.01.2022 contains is an authorization of survey under section 133A of the Act. Thus, it is a fact on record that no search and seizure operation was carried out on the assessee. This is vindicated from the fact that on perusal of the assessment record furnished before us by learned Departmental Representative; it is observed that in case of the assessee, the Assessing Officer has recorded a common satisfaction under section 153C on 18.09.2014 for assessment years 2007-08 to 2012-13. 10. Thus, we have to proceed on the basis that assessment proceedings were initiated and completed under section 153C of the Act. As discussed earlier, the Assessing Officer has recorded the satisfaction note under section 153C of the Act on 18.09.2014. In other words, the satisfaction note was recorded in fina ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessment. That being the legal position, the assessment order for the assessment year 2008-09, being void ab-initi o is unsustainable. Hence, deserves to be quashed. 12. Be that as it may, the second issue, which arises for consideration is, whether the additions made in the assessment orders are sustainable, keeping in view the provisions of section 153C of the Act and the legal position on the issue. It is the case of the assessee that the additions made are not based on any incriminating materials found as a result of search. It is beyond dispute that on the date of search and seizure operation on M/s. SRS Group, assessment proceedings for the impugned assessment years had not abated. Therefore, the additions, if any, have to be made based on seized materials. As discussed earlier, the additions made in the assessment orders are on account of disallowance of freight expenses. 13. Off course, in some of the assessment years under dispute, the Assessing Officer has made an additional disallowance relating to section 14A read with Rule 8D. Though, in the assessment and first appellate orders, the departmental authorities have observed that large numbers of incriminating mater ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
