Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 14 (0.67 seconds)The Right to Information Act, 2005
Section 153A in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 132 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 69C in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 158BD in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 132A in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Ssp Aviation Ltd. vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax on 29 March, 2012
36. The decision in SSP Aviation (supra) cannot be understood to mean
that the AO has the jurisdiction to make a reassement in every case, where
seized assets or documents are handed over to the AO. The question
whether the documents/assets seized could possibly reflect any undisclosed
income has to be considered by the AO after examining the seized
ITA 164/2015 & Other Connected Matters Page 38 of 40
assets/documents handed over to him. It is only in cases where the seized
documents/assets could possibly reflect any undisclosed income of the
Assessee for the relevant assessment years, that further enquiry would be
warranted in respect of those years. Whilst, it is not necessary for the AO to
be satisfied that the assets/documents seized during search of another
person reflect undisclosed income of an Assessee before commencing an
enquiry under Section 153C of the Act, it would be impermissible for him
to commence such enquiry if it is apparent that the documents/assets in
question have no bearing on the income of the Assessee for the relevant
assessment years.
Commissioner Of Income Tax ... vs Kabul Chawla on 28 August, 2015
21. As discussed hereinbefore, once the AO of the searched person is
satisfied that the seized assets/documents belong to another person and the
said assets/documents have been transferred to the AO of such other
person, the proceedings for assessment/reassessment of income of the other
person has to proceed in accordance with provisions of Section 153A of the
Act. Section 153A requires that where a search has been initiated under
Section 132 of the Act, the AO is required to issue notice requiring the
noticee to furnish returns of income in respect of six assessment years
relevant to the six previous years preceding the previous year in which the
search is conducted. As discussed hereinbefore, by virtue of second proviso
to Section 153A, the assessment/reassessment pending on the date of
initiation of search abate. In the context of proceedings under Section 153C
of the Act, the reference to the date of initiation of the search in the second
proviso to Section 153A has to be construed as the date on which the AO
ITA 164/2015 & Other Connected Matters Page 25 of 40
receives the documents or assets from the AO of the searched person. Thus,
by virtue of second proviso to Section 153A of the Act as it applies to
proceedings under Section 153C of the Act, the assessment/reassessment
pending on the date on which the assets/documents are received by the AO
would abate. In respect of such assessments which have abated, the AO
would have the jurisdiction to proceed and make an assessment. However,
in respect of concluded assessments, the AO would assume jurisdiction to
reassess provided that the assets/documents received by the AO represent
or indicate any undisclosed income or possibility of any income that may
have remained undisclosed in the relevant assessment years. This Court in
Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-III v. Kabul Chawla: ITA
707/2014, decided on 28th August, 2015 has held that completed
assessments could only be interfered with by the AO on the basis of any
incriminating material unearthed during the course of the search or
requisition of the documents. In absence of any incriminating material, the
AO does not have any jurisdiction to interfere in concluded assessments.
This Court had summarized the legal position in respect of Section 153A of
the Act as under:-
Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M/S Mechmen 11-C on 10 July, 2015
20. Mention may also be made to the decision of the Madhya Pradesh
High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Mechmen: (2015) 60
taxmann.com 484 (Madhya Pradesh). In that case, the Court had
explained that the fact that incidentally the AO is common at both stages
would not extricate him from recording satisfaction at the respective stages.
It was explained that since the satisfaction of the AO of a searched person
that assets/documents seized belong to some other person is sine qua non to
ITA 164/2015 & Other Connected Matters Page 24 of 40
commencing proceedings under Section 153C of the Act in respect of such
other person, the AO could not assume jurisdiction and transmit the items
to another file concerning the person (other than the one searched) pending
before him, before being satisfied that the seized assets/documents
belonged to the other person.