News Update

Maneka Gandhi declares assets worth Rs 97 Cr and files nomination papers from SultanpurGlobal Debt & Fiscal Silhouette rising! Do Elections contribute to fiscal slippages?ISRO study reveals possibility of water ice in polar cratersGST - Statutory requirement to carry the necessary documents should not be made redundant - Mistake committed by appellant is not extending e-way bill after the expiry, despite such liberty being granted under the Rules attracts penalty: HCBiden says migration has been good for US economyGST - Tax paid under wrong head of IGST instead of CGST/SGST - 'Relevant Date' for refund would be the date when tax is paid under the correct head: HCUS says NO to Rafah operation unless humanitarian plan is in place + Colombia snaps off ties with IsraelGST - Petitioner was given no opportunity to object to retrospective cancellation of registration - Order is also bereft of any details: HCMay Day protests in Paris & Istanbul; hundreds arrestedGST - Proper officer should have at least considered the reply on merits before forming an opinion - Ex facie, proper officer has not applied his mind: HCSaudi fitness instructor jailed for social media post - Amnesty International seeks releaseGST - A Rs.17.90 crores demand confirmed on Kendriya Bhandar by observing that reply is insufficient - Non-application of mind is clearly written all over the order: HCDelhi HC orders DGCA to deregister GO First’s aircraftGST - Neither the SCN nor the order spell the reasons for retrospective cancellation of registration, therefore, they are set aside: HCIndia successfully tests SMART anti-submarine missile-assisted torpedo systemST - Appellant was performing statutory functions as mandated by EPF & MP Act, and the Constitution of India, as per Board's Circular 96/7/2007-ST , services provided under Statutory obligations are not taxable: CESTATKiller heatwave kills hundreds of thousands of fish in Southern VietnamI-T - Scrutiny assessment order cannot be assailed where assessee confuses it with order passed pursuant to invocation of revisionary power u/s 263: HCHong Kong struck by close to 1000 lightningI-T - Assessment order invalidated where passed in rushed manner to avoid being hit by impending end of limitation period: HCColumbia Univ campus turns into ‘American Gaza’ - Pro-Palestinian students & counter-protesters clashI-T - Additions framed on account of bogus purchases merits being restricted to profit element embedded therein, where AO has not doubted sales made out of such purchases: HCIndia to host prestigious 46th Antarctic Treaty Consultative MeetingI-T - Miscellaneous Application before ITAT delayed by 1279 days without any just causes or bona fide; no relief for assessee: HCAdani Port & SEZ secures AAA RatingI-T - Assessee is eligible for deduction u/s 54EC on account of investment made in REC Bonds, provided both investments were made within period of six months as prescribed u/s 54EC: ITATNominations for Padma Awards 2025 beginsI-T - PCIT cannot invoke revisionary jurisdiction u/s 263 when there is no case of lack of enquiry or adequate enquiry on part of AO: ITATMissile-Assisted Release of Torpedo system successfully flight-tested by DRDOI-T - If purchases & corresponding sales were duly matched, it cannot be said that same were made out of disclosed sources of income: ITATViksit Bharat @2047: Taxes form the BedrockI-T - Reopening of assessment is invalid as while recording reasons for reopening of assessment, AO has not thoroughly examined materials available in his own record : ITAT
 
I-T - Revenue is not permitted to make additions based on unrelated incriminating materials found during course of search, if no assessments are pending on date of search: ITAT

 

By TIOL News Service

AHMEDABAD, MAR 22, 2019: THE ISSUE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL IS - Whether once assessments stood concluded on the date of search and are not pending consideration, then no adjustment to returned income is permitted u/s 153A in absence of incriminating material. YES IS THE ANSWER.

Facts of the case:

The assessee, an individual, had preferred present appeals challenging the jurisdiction usurped by the AO u/s 153A towards additions/disallowances made in the consequent assessment proceedings owing to search operations. The counsel for assessee submitted that the additions/disallowances made in both the appeals had no rational connection or live link with material found in the course of search action carried out u/s 132 in Sewani Group cases including assessee. The AR submitted that in pursuance of a notice u/s 153A for these assessment years in appeals, the assessment was inter alia completed for AYs 2008-09 & 2009-10. The assessment order was framed making certain additions and disallowances on re-appreciation of facts already disclosed/available with the department prior to search. It was further vehemently asserted that the adjustments made in the search assessments were possibly subject matter of regular assessment and did not resonate with the scheme of search assessment u/s 153A de hors reference to any incriminating material in this regard. The AR further emphasized that both these assessments stood concluded on the date of search and were not pending for assessment and hence in the absence of incriminating material, no adjustment in the returned income was permissible u/s 153A.

Tribunal held:

++ the first and foremost controversy that arises for adjudication is on the scope and ambit of assessment proceedings u/s 153A. The case propounded on behalf of the assessee that additions/disallowances made in Section 153A proceedings has no rational connection with incriminating material, if any, found as a result of search remains undisputed. It is also not dispute that assessment pertaining to the assessment years in question viz. AYs. 2008-09 & 2009-10 stood concluded either u/s 143(1) or u/s .143(3) and were not pending at the time of search. In the backdrop of these facts, it is straightway noticed that the scope of assessment u/s 153A in respect of completed assessment is circumscribed by the condition that the additions/disallowances must have some bearing with the incriminating material detected in the course of search. The scope of assessment u/s 153A in respect of concluded assessment is thus narrower in its sweep as held in long line of judicial precedents including the decision rendered by the Gujarat High Court in Devangi case. Thus, in the absence of any connection with the incriminating material, the additions/disallowances in respect of concluded assessments are not permissible in law.

(See 2019-TIOL-659-ITAT-AHM)


POST YOUR COMMENTS