Case Law Details
Dinesh Shah (HUF) Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai)
ITAT Mumbai held that the assessment made u/s 153C of the Income Tax Act beyond the six assessment year is without jurisdiction and liable to be quashed.
Facts- Pursuant to a search conducted on 10-12-2013 in the case of Ankur Shubham Group, it was found that the assessee was a key person of the said group, and since no search warrant was executed in the name of both the assessee’s, AO initiated proceedings u/s 153C after issuing notice in 2016, and since, the assessee being not the “searched person” for the purpose u/s 153A of the Act, for the purpose of section 153C of the Act, the reference to date of search has to construed as the date of recording satisfaction, which in this case is 15.03.2016 [AY 2016-17]. Consequently, six (6) assessment years for which assessment/re-assessment could be made u/s 153C of the Act would also have to be construed with reference to date of handing over of documents to AO of assessee/recording of satisfaction by AO of Assessee i.e, 15.03.2016. In this view, the assessment made u/s 153C of the Act for AY 2009-10 would be beyond the six assessment years as reckoned with reference to the date of recording of satisfaction viz 15.3.2016.
Conclusion- We therefore, accept the contention that the relevant assessment year i.e, AY 2009-10 were outside the scope of section 153C of the Act; and the AO had no jurisdiction to make an assessment of assessee’s income for AY 2009-10. For this preposition we rely on the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ld. CIT(A) v/s RRJ Security Ltd. (2013) 62 taxmann. com391 (Delhi), M/s Pavitra Relater Pvt. Ltd. v/s ACIT (87) taxmann.com 142.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT MUMBAI
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
