Proceedings u/s 153C void ab initio, where AO of searched person failed to rebut presumption that seized document belongs to other person

Brief of the Case

ITAT Delhi held In the case of ACIT vs, M/s Amrapali Grand that before a notice under Section 153C can be issued two steps have to be taken. The first step is that the Assessing Officer of the person who is searched must arrive at a clear satisfaction that a document seized from him does not belong to him but to some other person. The second step is after such satisfaction is arrived at that the document is handed over to the Assessing Officer of the person to whom the said document “belongs”. It is for the Assessing Officer to rebut that presumption and come to a conclusion or “satisfaction” that the document in fact belongs to somebody else. There, must be some cogent material available with the Assessing Officer before he /she arrives at the satisfaction that the seized document does not belong to the searched person but to somebody else. Surmise and conjecture cannot take the place of “satisfaction”.

Facts of the Case

C.O. No.150/Del/14 – Legal ground

A search and seizure operation was conducted on 9.9.2010 in Amrapali Group of cases. Subsequently, a notice u/s 153C of the Act was issued on 12.4.12 to the present assessee and in response to which the assessee filed a letter stating that the return declaring income of Rs. 1,01,96,580 filed on 30.09.2009 may be treated as filed in response to the said notice. Further, notice u/s 142(1) along with questionnaire on 8.2.2012 and 7.9.2012 and another notice u/s 143(2) was issued on 7.9.12.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.