Vijay Madan Varma Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai)
ITAT Mumbai held that proceedings u/s. 153A of the Income Tax Act is bad in law since case falls within parameters of rule 112F r.w. third proviso to section 153A, however, no certificate was issued by investigating officer even when cash was found during election period.
Facts- Vide the present appeal, the assessee has mainly challenged the validity of proceedings u/s.153A on the ground that the ld. AO has passed the assessment order without following the requirement and procedure laid down in Rule 112F r.w.s.153A read with third proviso.
Conclusion- Held that the assessee’s case clearly falls within the parameters of Rule 112F r.w. third proviso to Section 153A. Once the procedure prescribed in said rule as clarified by the CBDT has not been complied with and no certificate has been issued by the Investigation Officer even when the cash was found during the election period, ld. AO could not have issued notices u/s.153A for the six earlier assessment years. Accordingly, there was a clear violation of Rule 112F and the procedures laid down by the CBDT vide Circular No.10 of 2012 (supra). Accordingly, the entire proceedings u/s.153A for the A.Y.2019-20 and 2020-21 is held as bad in law and accordingly, the same is quashed. On this ground alone the assessment order for A.Y.2019-20 and A.Y.2020-21 in invalid and consequently, the additional ground raised by the assessee is allowed.
