ANS DHIVYAM JEWELLS,SALEM V. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SALEM

ITA 3744/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves four appeals by ANS Dhivyam Jewells against the orders passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) 20, Chennai, for the assessment years 2018-19, 2019-20, 2020-21, and 2021-22. The primary legal issue was the validity of the notices issued under section 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961, following a search operation conducted on M/s. Mohanlal Jewellers (P.) Limited. The tribunal examined whether the notices issued to ANS Dhivyam Jewells were validly issued based on the procedural requirements of section 153C, particularly concerning the date of satisfaction recorded by the Assessing Officer.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 840606 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2019-2020
• Appeal Filed On: 09-12-2025
• Other Referred Cases: Harigovind v. ACIT
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHIVA SRINIVAS
• Assessee Lawyers: G. BASKAR
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’बी’ Ɋायपीठ, चेɄई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI ŵी एस.एस. िवʷनेũ रिव, Ɋाियक सद˟ एवं ŵी एस.आर. रगुनाथॎ, लेखा सद˟ क े समƗ Before Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member & Shri S.R. Raghunatha, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3743, 3744, 3745 & 3746/Chny/2025 िनधाŊरण वषŊ/Assessment Years: 2018-19, 2019-20, 2020-21 & 2021-22 ANS Dhivyam Jewells, 184/385, Bazaar Street, Salem 636 001. [PAN:AAKFA1977G] Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 3, Salem. (अपीलाथŎ/Appellant) (ŮȑथŎ/Respondent) अपीलाथŎ की ओर से / Appellant by : Shri G. Baskar, Advocate ŮȑथŎ की ओर से/Respondent by : Shri Shiva Srinivas, CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 17.02.2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 26.02.2026 आदेश /O R D E R PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER: These four appeals filed by the assessee are directed against different orders all dated 20.11.2025 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) 20, Chennai for the assessment years 2018-19, 2019-20, 2020-21 & 2021-22. 2. Since issues raised in these the appeals of the assessees are similar based on the same identical facts, with the consent of both the parties, we proceed to hear the appeals together and pass consolidated order for the sake of convenience. Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. Nos.3743 to 3746/Chny/25 2 3. First, we shall take appeal in ITA No. 3743/Chny/2025 for AY 2018- 19 for adjudication. 4. The ld. AR Shri G. Baskar, Advocate referred to ground No.2 (2.1 to 2.10 and additional ground Nos. 1 to 3) and submits that the assessment proceedings initiated by the Assessing Officer by issue of notice dated 10.08.2023 under section 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short], is null and void. 5. He submits that a search was conducted in the case of M/s. Mohanlal Jewellers (P.) Limited on 10.11.2020 and the Assessing Officer of the searched person recorded his satisfaction and transferred the to the Central Circle on 19.07.2023 and accordingly Assessing Officer of the assessee recorded his satisfaction on 10.08.2023 which is deemed to be the date of search in the case of the assessee. He drew our attention to page 1 to 12 of the paper book and referred to decision of Hon’ble High Court of Madras in the case of Harigovind v. ACIT reported in 180 taxman.com 197 (Madras) and argued that the facts and circumstances of present case is squarely covered by the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Madras in the case of Harigovind v. ACIT (supra) and prayed to allow the additional ground No.1. Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. Nos.3743 to 3746/Chny/25 3 6. The ld. DR Shri Shiva Srinivas, CIT submits that the above said ground was not raised before the Assessing Officer and the ld. CIT(A) and relied on the order of the ld. CIT(A). 7. Heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. We note that admittedly, the date of search in the case of the assessee is to be the date on which satisfaction recorded by the Assessing Officer on the assessee, i.e., 10.08.2023, which is after 01.04.2021, which is not disputed by the ld. DR, therefore, the provisions of section 153C of the Act is not applicable and thus, as stated by the Assessing Officer at para 6 of the assessment order, the notice dated 10.08.2023 issued under section 153C of the Act is invalid. Therefore, the consequent assessment order made thereon under section 153C of the Act vide order dated 10.12.2024 is liable to be quashed in view of the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in the case of Harigovind v. ACIT (supra). Thus, ground No. 2 (2.1 to 2.10) stands allowed. In view of our decision in ground No. 2 (2.1 to 2.10), all other grounds raised by the assessee become academic and requires no adjudication. I.T.A. No. 3744/Chny/2025 – AY 2019-20 8. The ld. AR referred to ground No.2 (2.1 to 2.10 and additional ground Nos. 1 to 3) and submits that the assessment proceedings Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. Nos.3743 to 3746/Chny/25 4 initiated by the Assessing Officer by issue of notice dated 10.08.2023 under section 153C of the Act, is null and void. 9. The ld. DR Shri Shiva Srinivas, CIT submits that the above said ground was not raised before the Assessing Officer and the ld. CIT(A) and relied on the order of the ld. CIT(A). 10. Heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. We note that admittedly, the date of search in the case of the assessee is to be the date on which satisfaction recorded by the Assessing Officer on the assessee, i.e., 10.08.2023, which is after 01.04.2021, which is not disputed by the ld. DR, therefore, the provisions of section 153C of the Act is not applicable and thus, as stated by the Assessing Officer at para 6 of the assessment order, the notice dated 10.08.2023 issued under section 153C of the Act is invalid. Therefore, the consequent assessment order made thereon under section 143(3) r.w.s. 153C of the Act vide order dated 29.11.2024 is liable to be quashed in view of the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in the case of Harigovind v. ACIT (supra). Thus, ground No. 2 (2.1 to 2.10) stands allowed. In view of our decision in ground No. 2 (2.1 to 2.10), all other grounds raised by the assessee become academic and requires no adjudication. Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. Nos.3743 to 3746/Chny/25 5 I.T.A. No. 3745/Chny/2025 – AY 2020-21 11. The ld. AR referred to ground No.2 (2.1 to 2.10 and additional ground Nos. 1 to 3) and submits that the assessment proceedings initiated by the Assessing Officer by issue of notice dated 10.08.2023 under section 153C of the Act, is null and void. 12. The ld. DR Shri Shiva Srinivas, CIT submits that the above said ground was not raised before the Assessing Officer and the ld. CIT(A) and relied on the order of the ld. CIT(A). 13. Heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. We note that admittedly, the date of search in the case of the assessee is to be the date on which satisfaction recorded by the Assessing Officer on the assessee, i.e., 10.08.2023, which is after 01.04.2021, which is not disputed by the ld. DR, therefore, the provisions of section 153C of the Act is not applicable and thus, as stated by the Assessing Officer at para 6 of the assessment order, the notice dated 10.08.2023 issued under section 153C of the Act is invalid. Therefore, the consequent assessment order made thereon under section 153C r.w.s. 144 of the Act vide order dated 29.11.2024 is liable to be quashed in view of the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in the case of Harigovind v. ACIT (supra). Thus, ground No. 2 (2.1 to 2.10) stands Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. Nos.3743 to 3746/Chny/25 6 allowed. In view of our decision in ground No. 2 (2.1 to 2.10), all other grounds raised by the assessee become academic and requires no adjudication. I.T.A. No. 3746/Chny/2025 – AY 2021-22 14. The ld. AR referred to ground No.2 (2.1 to 2.10 & additional grounds 1 to 3) and submits that the assessment proceedings initiated by the Assessing Officer by issue of notice dated 10.08.2023 under section 153C of the Act, is null and void. 15. The ld. DR Shri Shiva Srinivas, CIT submits that the above said ground was not raised before the Assessing Officer and the ld. CIT(A) and relied on the order of the ld. CIT(A). 16. Heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. We note that admittedly, the date of search in the case of the assessee is to be the date on which satisfaction recorded by the Assessing Officer on the assessee, i.e., 10.08.2023, which is after 01.04.2021, which is not disputed by the ld. DR, therefore, the provisions of section 153C of the Act is not applicable and thus, as stated by the Assessing Officer at para 6 of the assessment order, the notice dated 10.08.2023 issued under section 153C of the Act is invalid. Therefore, the consequent assessment order made thereon under section 153C of the Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. Nos.3743 to 3746/Chny/25 7 Act vide order dated 29.11.2024 is liable to be quashed in view of the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in the case of Harigovind v. ACIT (supra). Thus, ground No. 2 (2.1 to 2.10 and additional ground Nos. 1 to 3) stands allowed. In view of our decision in ground No. 2 (2.1 to 2.10), all other grounds raised by the assessee become academic and requires no adjudication. 17. In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed. Order pronounced on 26th February, 2026 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (S.R. RAGHUNATHA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated, 26.02.2026 Vm/- आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथŎ/Appellant, 2.ŮȑथŎ/ Respondent, 3. आयकर आयुƅ/CIT, Chennai/Madurai/Coimbatore/Salem 4. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध/DR & 5. गाडŊ फाईल/GF. Printed from counselvise.com "