Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

4. That the appellant craves the right to add, delete, amend or abandon any of the grounds of appeal either before or at the time of hearing of appeal."

2. Briefly stated the facts are that the, a search & seizure operation was carried out u/s 132(1) of the Income Tax Act 1961 on 08/06/2011 at the different premises of Jaipur Hospital Group. Residential premises of the assessee were also covered under the search as he was associated with Jaipur Hospital. A Notice u/s 153A of the Act was issued to the assessee on 15/06/2012. In response thereto the assessee furnished his return of income on 24/12/2012 declaring total income of Rs. 614065/- same as was declared as original return filed on 31/10/2006/-. Subsequently, the assessment was framed u/s 143(3) read with section 153A of the Act thereby the Assessing Officer made addition on account of disallowance on rent Dr. Vikram Goyal, Jaipur.

found/ seized as a result of search and simply rejected the plea of the assessee for the sole reason that the SLP has been accepted by the hon'ble apex court against the decision of hon'ble Delhi high court delivered in the case of Kabul Chawla 281 CTR 45.

It is humbly submitted that, the impugned assessment order of Ld. AO suffers from serious error in-as-much-as, it is not based on a single loose paper found / seized as the result of search conducted in the case of assessee; on the other hand and contrary to the law, this order is clearly in the nature of regular assessment order and therefore, could not have been made under the garb of section 153A particularly when the returned income was accepted by department and the case of assessee was not picked up for scrutiny and thus assessment for the year under appeal in the case of assessee was not pending before the Ld. AO, as on the date of search. Thus, when no assessment proceedings pertaining to the year under appeal were pending before the Ld. AO, no proceedings could have abated due to the search and therefore, cannot be considered as merged into the assessment u/s 153A. It may kindly be noted that, the returned income was processed and accepted by the department and the case was not picked for scrutiny, and thus the assessment in the case of assessee for the year under appeal stood already finalized. No proceedings relating to the assessment with respect to the assessment year under appeal were pending before the Ld. AO as on the date of search, and therefore, the Ld. AO's jurisdiction was merely limited to the material found during the course of search and he could not have completed the assessment u/s 153A without referring to any material found / seized during the course of search. Therefore, it was not permissible for the Ld. AO to make regular scrutiny assessment under the garb of assessment u/s 153A in view of the fact that the returned income was accepted and the case was not selected for scrutiny.

Legally viewing the matter, it can be said that it is a settled proposition of law based on numerous judgments of Hon'ble High Courts of the Nation (including Jurisdictional High Court) and a catena of ITAT judgments that, no additions could be made in the assessment u/s 153A for a particular assessment year if there is no incriminating Dr. Vikram Goyal, Jaipur.

material found as a result of search, and assessment u/s 153A cannot be employed as a substitute for regular assessment. Thus, it is submitted that the additions made vide impugned assessment could not have been made at all in assessment made u/s 153A on income which already stands accepted especially when no incriminating material in this regard was found as a result of search.

search or requisition". It is connected to Section 132 which deals with 'search and seizure'. Both these provisions, therefore, have to be read together. Sec. 153A is indeed an extremely potent power which enables the Revenue to reopen at least six years of assessments earlier to the year of search. It is not to be exercised lightly. It is only if during the course of search under Section 132 incriminating material justifying the reopening of the assessments for six previous is found that the invocation of Section 153A qua each of the assessment years would be justified. If no incriminating materials were found during the course of search in respect of an issue, then no additions in respect of any issue can be made to the assessment u/s 153A and 153C. In the present case, it is not the case of revenue that the assessment has been framed on the basis of incriminating material found during the course of search. The Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Jai Steel (India) vs. ACIT 259 CTR (Raj) 281 as relied by the assessee and also held that for the completed assessment, same can be tinkered only based on the incriminating material found during the course of search or requisition of documents. Therefore, the assessment in the case, where the assessment has been completed or not pending on the date of search. The Assessing Officer can frame assessment only on the basis of the incriminating material gathered during the course of search. Respectfully following the Judgments of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court and Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court rendered in the case of Pr. CIT vs. Meeta Gutgutia (supra) and Jai Steel (India) vs. ACIT (Supra). The assessment as framed by the Assessing Officer is quashed, as no incriminating material was found during the search. The Dr. Vikram Goyal, Jaipur.