Case Law Details
Lalji Khimjibhai Patel Vs ACIT (ITAT Rajkot)
The issue under consideration is whether the assessee is correct in stating that cognizance taken under section 153A of the Act is illegal at the end of the A.O.?
ITAT states that, the assessee has challenged validity of jurisdiction invoked by the AO under section 153A of the Act. However, on perusal of the record would indicate that statement of the assessee was recorded under section 132(4) of the Act during the course of search, and he has admitted unaccounted income of Rs. 80,69,186/-. The disclosure made under section 132(4) is an admissible evidence, and therefore, it is to be concluded that during the course of search material was found, which gave authority to the AO to invoke jurisdiction under section 153A of the Act. Apart from the above, it also emerges out that during the course of search certain jottings and notings showing figure of Rs.86,69,186/- as unexplained investment was also found, which was confronted to the assessee during the course of search in his statement under section 132(4) of the Act. As per ITAT, it is a sufficient material for forming a prima facie opinion that income has escaped assessment and notice under section 153A is required to be made. Therefore, action taken by the AO under section 153A in this year is concerned, is upheld. Accordingly, this ground raised by the assessee’s appeal in this year are rejected.
FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT JUDGEMENT
The ld.CIT(A) has decided four quantum appeals of the assessee against the assessment orders passed under section 143(3) r.w. Section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in the Asstt.Years 2001-02, 2005-06 to 2007-08 by separate orders on 27.11.2009. These orders have been challenged by the assessee in ITA No.712 to 715/RJT/2010. Similarly, the ld.CIT(A) has decided penalty appeals of the assessee against orders passed under section 271(1)(c) of the Act in all these four years by separate orders on 26.8.2013, and these orders are being impugned by the assessee in ITA No.388 to 391/RJT/2013. Since common issues are involved, therefore, we heard all these appeals together and deem it appropriate to dispose of them by this common order. First we take quantum appeals.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
