M/s. Extra Marketing Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi V. DCIT, New Delhi

CO 330/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0355 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Cross Objection
• Pronouncement Date: 18-03-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 02-03-2015
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 24-11-2014
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: POONAM KHAIRA SIDHU
• Keywords: Search and seizure; Assessment record
• Section: 69C; 153A; 132

Judgement Text

IN TH E INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH B NEW DELHI BEFORE: SHRI N.K. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K. , JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO S . 5986 TO 5991/ DEL/ 2013 ASS ESSMENT YEARS 200 3 - 0 4 TO 2008 - 09 DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 21 VS. M/S . EXTRA MARKETING PVT. LTD. ROOM NO.344, E - 2, ARA CENTRE, RZ - F - 7, DAWARKA PURI, JHANDEWALAN EXT. VIJAY ENCLAVE, NEW DELHI - 45. NEW DELHI NEW DELHI (PAN AA BCE 7963 J ) C.O. NO S . 329 TO 334 / DEL / 2014 (IN ITA NOS. 5986 TO 5991/DEL/2013 ) A SSESSMENT Y EAR S 2003 - 04 TO 2008 - 09 M/S. EXTRA MARKETING PVT. LTD. VS. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 21 RZ - F - 7, DAWARKA PURI, ROOM NO.344, E - 2, ARA CENTRE, VIJAY ENCLAVE, NEW DELHI - 45. JHANDEWALAN EX T. NEW DELHI NEW DELHI (PAN AABCE 7963 J) ( APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) DATE OF HEARING : 12.03.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 18 .03.2015 APPELLANT BY : SMT. POONA M , KHAIRA SIDHU, CIT,DR RESPONDENT BY: SH . ARVIND KUMAR, ADVOCATE ITA NOS. 5986 DEL/ 2013 C.O. NOS. 329/D/2014 2 OR DER PER BENCH : 1. THESE APPEAL S , AT THE INSTANCE OF THE REVENUE AND THE CROSS OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSE E , ARISE OUT OF SIX SEPARATE ORDERS OF CIT (A) , ALL PASSED IN THE MONTH OF AUGUST, 2013. THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR S ARE 200 3 - 0 4 TO 2008 - 09 . 2. IN REVENUE S APPEALS, IDENTICAL GROUNDS ARE RAISED EXCEPT FOR VARIATION IN FIGURES. TWO EFFECTIVE GROUNDS RAISED IN REVENUE S APPEALS RELATE TO: I) WHETHER THE CIT (A) WA S JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE DISALLOWANCE S OF EXPENDITURE MADE BY THE AO ; & . II) WHETH ER THE CIT (A) WA S JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE ADDITION S MADE ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED PURCHASE S U/S 69C OF THE ACT. 3. IN THE ASSESSEE S CROSS OBJECTION S , SEVERAL GROUNDS ARE RAISED. THE MAJORITY OF THE GROUNDS RELATE TO THE ISSUE OF CHALLENG ING THE INITI ATION OF PROCEEDING S U/S 153C OF THE ACT. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD. DR THAT THE ASSESSEE S CROSS OBJECTIONS ARE BELATED AND ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED CONDONATION APPLICATION FOR CONDONING THE DELAY. WITH REFERENCE TO THE ABOVE CONTENTION, IT WAS SUBMITTED B Y THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE THAT THE CERTIFIED TRUE COPIES OF THE REVENUE S APPEALS (FORM 36 WITH THE GROUNDS OF APPEALS) WHICH WAS FILED ON 06.11.2013 WAS NOT RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE AND ASSESSEE HAD FILED AN APPLICATION DATED 17.11.2014 TO THE IT AT REGISTRY FOR PROVIDING THE CERTIFIED TRUE COPIES OF THE REVENUE S APPEALS . IN WAS SUBMITTED THAT T HE CERTIFIED TRUE COPIES OF THE REVENUE S APPEALS WERE FURNISHED TO THE ASSESSEE ON 1 9.11.2014 FOR THE RESPECTIVE ASSESSMENT YEARS AND CROSS OBJECTIONS WER E FILED ON 24.11.2014 WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED ITA NOS. 5986 DEL/ 2013 C.O. NOS. 329/D/2014 3 TIME LIMIT . THE DIRECTOR OF THE ASSESSEE S COMPANY HAS ALSO FILED AN AFFIDAVIT TO THIS EFFECT. THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE DIRECTOR OF THE ASSESSEE S COMPANY READS AS FOLLOWS: - 1. THAT, ON 18.11.2014 PVK MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS : EXTRA MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED) HAS FILED AN APPLICATION DATED 17.11.2014 FOR PROVIDING THE CERTIFIED TRUE COPIES OF REVENUE S APPEALS (FORM 36 WITH GROUNDS OF APPEALS) FILED ON 06.11.2013 IN ITA NOS. 5986/DEL - 2013 TO 5991/DEL - 2013, WITH ITAT, NEW DELHI. 2. THAT, THE ASSESSEE COMPANY DEPOSITED THE PRESCRIBED FEES OF RS.40/ - EACH ON 18.11.2014 FOR EACH ASSESSMENT YEAR, STARTING FROM AY. 2003 - 04 TO AY. 2008 - 09 VIDE CHALLAN NOS. 44222, 44238, 439 45, 44276, 44296 AND 44309. 3. THAT, THE ASSESSEE COMPANY WAS PROVIDED THE CERTIFIED TRUE COPIES OF REVENUE S APPEALS (FORM 36 WITH GROUNDS OF APPEALS) ON 19.11.2014 FOR THE AY. 2003 - 04 TO AY.2008 - 09. 4. THAT THE ASSESSEE COMPANY FILED CROSS OBJECTIONS ON 24.11.2014 VIDE CO. NOS. 329/DEL - 2014 FOR THE AY. 2003 - 04; 330/DEL - 2014 FOR THE AY. 2004 - 05; 331/DEL - 2014 FOR THE AY. 2005 - 06; 332/DEL - 2014 FOR THE AY. 2006 - 07; 333/DEL - 2014 FOR THE AY. 2007 - 08; AND 334/DEL - 2014 FOR THE AY. 2008 - 09. 5. THAT, THE ASSESSEE C OMPANY DID NOT RECEIVE ANY OTHER COPIES OF REVENUE S APPEALS (FORM 36 WITH GROUNDS OF APPEALS) OTHER THAN THE COPIES AS MENTIONED IN PARA 3 HEREINABOVE. 4. IN VIEW OF ABOVE MENTIONED FACTS, THERE IS NO DELAY IN FILING THE SE CROSS OBJECTION S AND ACCORDING LY WE PROCEED TO DISPOSE OF THE CROSS OBJECTION S ON MERIT. 5 . AT THE VERY OUTSET, THE L D. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSE E , REFERRING TO THE GROUNDS RAISED IN THE CO S , SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSMENT S MADE U/S 153C OF THE ACT WERE INVALID, SINCE SATISFACTION WAS NO T RECORDED BY THE AO IN THE FILES OF THE SEARCHED PERSON PRIOR TO INITIATION OF PROCEEDING S U/S 153C OF THE ACT . T HE SAID ISSUE , IT WAS SUBMITTED , WAS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE ORDERS OF THE COORDINATE BENCH ES OF TH IS TRIBUNAL WHICH , IN TURN , HAD PLACED RELIANCE ON THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON BLE ITA NOS. 5986 DEL/ 2013 C.O. NOS. 329/D/2014 4 JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF M/S . PEPSICO INDIA HOLDING PVT. LTD V . ACIT REPORTED IN 367 ITR (673 )/122 (DEL) . 6 . THE L D. DR PRESENT WAS DULY HEARD. THE L D. DR HAS GIVEN A WRITTEN SUBMISSION WITH REFERENCE TO THE ISSUE S RAISED BY THE L D. AR. 7. IN REJOINDER, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE WRITTEN SUBMISSION FILED IN THE INSTANT CASE IS IDENTICAL TO THE WRITTEN SUBMISSION FILED BY THE REVENUE IN THE CASE OF TANVIR FINANCE & LEASING LTD. IN ITA NOS. 14 TO 17/DEL/2014 & CO NOS.399 & 400/DEL/2014 ORDER DATED 27.02.2015. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD. AR AFTER CONSIDERING THE WRITTEN SUBMISSION FILED BY THE REVENUE, THE MATTER WAS DECIDED AGAINST THE REVENUE ON IDENTICAL FACTS AN D CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE INSTANT CASE. THE LD. DR WAS UNABLE TO CONTROVERT THE ABOVE CONTENTION OF THE LD. AR. 8. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL S ON RECORD. THE SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERATION S U/S 132 OF THE ACT WAS CARRIED OUT I N THE CASES OF SRI B.K.DHINGRA, POONAM DHINGRA AND M/S. MADHUSUDAN BUILDCON (P) LIMITED ON 20.10.2008. THE AO RECORDED SATISFACTION NOTE FOR ISSUING NOTICE U/S 153C OF THE ACT TO THE ASSESSEE ON 5.7.2010 AND THE NOTICE U/S 153C OF THE ACT WAS ISSUED TO TH E ASSESSE E ON 8.7.2010. IN RESPONSE, THE ASSESSEE FILED RETURNS OF INCOME FOR ALL THE SIX ASSESSMENT YEARS UNDER DISPUTE. THE SATISFACTION NOTE FOR INITIATION OF PROCEEDINGS U/S 153C OF THE ACT AGAINST THE ASSESSEE IS PLACED AT PAGE 5 OF THE PAPER BOOK F ILED BY THE ASSESSEE . THE SATISFACTION NOTE RECORDED BY THE AO READS AS FOLLOWS: ITA NOS. 5986 DEL/ 2013 C.O. NOS. 329/D/2014 5 SATISFACTION NOTE FOR ISSUING NOTICE U/S 153C OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 IN THE CASE OF M/S EXTRA MARKETING PVT. LTD., KHASRA NO.34/7, VILLAGE DERA MANDI, TEHSIL MEHARAULI, NEW DELHI, AABCE7963J FOR A.Y. 2003 - 04 TO 2008 - 09. 05/07/2010 DOCUMENTS AT PAGES 46 - 90 OF ANNEXURE A 35 SEIZED BY THE PARTY R - 2 FROM THE PREMISES AT F - 6/5, VASANT VIHAR, NEW DELHI, DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH CONDUCTED U/S 132 OF THE IT ACT, 1961, ON 20.1 0.2008 IN THE CASE OF SH. B.K. DHINGRA, SMT. POONAM DHINGRA, M/S. MADHUSUDAN BUILDCON PVT. LTD HAVE BEEN FOUND TO BELONG TO M/S. EXTRA MARKETING PVT. LTD 34/7 , VILLAGE DERA MANDI, TEHSIL MEHARAULI, NEW DELHI, WHICH HAS NOT BEEN COVERED U/S 132 OF THE IT AC T, 1961. ACCORDINGLY, IN TERMS OF PROVISIONS OF SECTION 153C OF THE ACT, NOTICES U/S 153C ARE HEREBY ISSUED FOR THE AY 2003 - 04 TO 2008 - 09 IN THE CASE OF M/S. M/S EXTRA MARKETING PVT. LTD. THE CASE WAS CENTRALIZED IN THE CENTRAL CIRCLE - 17, NEW DELHI VIDE ORDERS 14/DEC/09 OF CIT - I V, NEW DELHI. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 17, NEW DELHI. 9. ON THE BASIS OF RTI APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE, A LETTER WAS ISSUED BY THE AO [F.NO.DCIT/CC - 17/RTI/2013 - 14/122 DATED 10.6.2013] STATING THAT NO SATISFACTION IS RECORDED IN THE FILE OF THE SEARCHED PERSON FOR INITIATION OF PROCEEDINGS U/S 153C OF THE ACT IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE. THE LETTER OF THE AO READS AS FOLLOWS: SUB: APPLICATION FOR SEEKING INFORMATION UNDER RTI ACT, 2005 REG PLEASE REFER TO YOUR APPLICATION ON THE ABOVE MENTIONED SUBJECT. 2. FROM THE ASSESSMENT RECORDS OF SH. BHUPESH KUMAR DHINGRA WHICH IS COVERED UNDER SECTION 153A, FOR THE ASST. YEARS FROM 2003 - 04 TO 2008 - 09 (B LOCK PERIOD), IT IS NOTICED THAT THERE IS NO SATISFACTION NOTE AVAILABLE/RECORDED IN RESPECT OF OTHER ENTITIES. SIMILAR LETTER ADDRESSED TO THE OTHER SEARCHED PERSONS, NAMELY, SMT. POONAM DHINGRA AND M/S. MADHUSUDAN BUILDCON PVT. LTD A RE ALSO PLACED ON RECORD AT PAGES 4 AND 5 OF THE PB FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. 10. THE CONTENTION OF THE LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS THAT IT IS APPARENT FROM THE ASSESSMENT RECORDS OF THE SEARCHED ENTITIES THAT THE REQUIRED SATISFACTION NOTE UNDER ITA NOS. 5986 DEL/ 2013 C.O. NOS. 329/D/2014 6 SECTION 153C OF THE ACT WAS NOT RECORDED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER OF THE SEARCHED PERSONS/ENTITIES. 11. THIS ISSUE RAISED BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE IS NO LONGER RES INTEGRA . THE CO - ORDINATE BENCHES OF THIS TRIBUNAL HAVE CONSIDERED AN IDENTICAL IS SUE TO THAT OF THE PRESENT MATTER UNDER DISPUTE IN THEIR ORDERS. THE DETAILS OF THE ORDERS OF THE EARLIER BENCHES OF THIS TRIBUNAL ARE AS UNDER: (I) TANVIR COLLECTIONS PVT. LTD V. ACIT [ITA NO.2421/DEL/2014 DATED: 16.1.2015]; (II) DCIT V. M/S. AAKASH AR OGYA MINDIR P. LTD [ITA NOS. 5437 TO 5442/DEL/2013 DATED: 28.11.2014]; & (III) ACIT V. INLAY MARKETING PVT. LTD [ITA NOS.4200 TO 4202/DEL/2012 & 4197 TO 4199/DEL/2012 DATED: 14.11.2014] (IV) DCIT VS. TANVIR FINANCE & LEASING LTD. (ITA NOS.14 TO 17/DEL/201 4, CO NOS. 268 TO 271/DEL/2014 & ITA NOS. 3317 & 3318/DEL/2014 DATED 27.02.2015). 12 . IN THE CASE OF TANVIR FINANCE & LEASING LTD. (SUPRA), THE COORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL HAD DECIDED THE ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. SINCE THE FACTS AND THE CON TENTION S CONSIDERED BY THE REVENUE IN THE CASE OF TANVIR FINANCE & LEASING LTD. (SUPRA) IS IDENTICAL TO THE PRESENT CASE , THE FINDING OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF TANVIR FINANCE & LEASING LTD. (SUPRA) IS REPRODUCED BELOW: - 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. WE HAVE ALSO TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS FILED BY THE LD. DR ON 27.02.2012. IT IS MANIFEST FROM THE ASSESSMENT ORDERS FOR THE YEARS UNDER CONSIDERATION THAT A SEARCH WAS CARRIE D OUT U/S 132 OF THE ACT ON SH. B.K. DHINGRA, SMT. POONAM DHINGRA & M/S MADHUSUDAN BUILDCON PVT. LTD. AND IN SUCH SEARCH PROCEEDINGS, SOME INCRIMINATING DOCUMENTS BELONGING TO THE ASSESSEE WERE FOUND WHICH LED TO THE MAKING OF THE INSTANT ASSESSMENTS U/S 153C OF THE ACT. IN ORDER TO PROPERLY APPRECIATE THE CONTENTION MADE BY THE LD. AR ON THIS SCORE, WE CONSIDER IT EXPEDIENT TO CONSIDER THE SO - CALLED SATISFACTION RECORDED BY THE AO. THERE IS NO DISPUTE THAT THE SATISFACTION HAS BEEN RECORDED FOR ALL THE YEARS UNDER CONSIDERATION IN MUTATIS MUTANDIS SIMILAR MANNER. FOR THE SAKE OF REFERENCE AND ON A REPRESENTATIVE BASIS, WE ARE REPRODUCING THE SATISFACTION RECORDED FOR THE A.Y. 2003 - 04, AS UNDER: ITA NOS. 5986 DEL/ 2013 C.O. NOS. 329/D/2014 7 SATISFACTION NOTE FOR ISSUING NOTICE U/S 153C OF THE I .T. ACT, 1961 IN THE CASE OF M/S TANVEER FINANCE & LEASING LTD., WZ 13, STREET NO. 18, KRISHNA PARK, TILAK NAGAR, NEW DELHI, PAN NO. FOR A.Y. 2003 - 04 TO 2008 - 09. 05/07/2010 DOCUMENTS AT PAGES 231 329 OF ANNEXURE OF A - 23 AND AT PAGES 61 TO 154 OF ANNEXUR E A - 32 SEIZED BY THE PARTY R - 2 FROM THE PREMISES AT F 6/5, VASANT VIHAR, NEW DELHI DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH CONDUCTED U/S 132 OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 ON 20/10/2008 IN THE CASE OF SH. B.K. DHINGRA, SMT. POONAM DHINGRA, M/S MADHUSUDAN BUILDCON P. LTD. HAVE BEEN FOUND TO BELONG TO M/S TANVEER FINANCE & LEASING LTD., WZ 13, STREET NO. 18, KRISHNA PARK, TILAK NAGAR, NEW DELHI WHICH HAS NOT BEEN COVERED U/S 132 OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961. ACCORDINGLY, IN TERMS OF PROVISIONS OF SEC. 153C OF THE ACT, NOTICES U/S 153C ARE HEREBY ISSUED FOR THE A.Y. 2003 - 04 TO 2008 - 09 IN THE CASE OF M/S TANVEER FINANCE & LEASING LTD. THE CASE WAS CENTRALIZED IN THE CENTRAL CIRCLE 17, NEW DELHI VIDE ORDERS DATED 03.11.2009 OF CIT - VI, NEW DELHI. SD/ - DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 17, NEW DELHI 5. THE VIEW CANVASSED BY THE LD. AR IS THAT NO SATISFACTION WAS RECORDED BY THE AO OF THE THREE PERSONS SEARCHED AND THE ABOVE SATISFACTION WAS RECORDED IN THE FILE OF AND BY THE AO OF THE ASSESSEE ONLY. TO SUBSTANTIATE THIS CONTENTION, THE LD. AR INVIT ED OUR ATTENTION TOWARDS PAGES 10A TO 10C OF THE PAPER BOOK, BEING COPIES OF THE REPLY GIVEN BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 17, NEW DELHI IN RESPONSE TO THE APPLICATIONS FILED BY SH. B.K. DHINGRA, SMT. POONAM DHINGRA AND M/S MADH USUDAN BUILDCON P. LTD. UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF RTI ACT, 2005. THE RELEVANT PART OF THE REPLY GIVEN TO SH. B.K. DHINGRA, WHICH IS SIMILAR TO THAT GIVEN TO THE OTHER TWO PERSONS ALSO, IS REPRODUCED AS UNDER: 2. FROM THE ASSESSMENT RECORDS OF SH. BHUPES H KUMAR DHINGRA, WHICH IS COVERED U/S 153A, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS FROM 2003 - 04 TO 2008 - 09 (BLOCK PERIOD) IT IS NOTICED THAT THERE IS NO SATISFACTION NOTE AVAILABLE/RECORDED IN RESPECT OF OTHER ENTITIES. 3. IN CASE YOU INTEND TO FILE THE APPEAL, YOU M AY FILE THE SAME BEFORE THE ADDL. CIT, CENTRAL RANGE - 2, 3 RD FLOOR, ARA CENTRE, E - 2, JHANDEWALAN, NEW DELHI WITHIN 30 DAYS FROM RECEIPT OF THIS LETTER. 6. FROM THE ABOVE REPRODUCED SATISFACTION RECORDED BY THE AO OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE REPLY GIVEN UNDER THE RTI ACT TO THE THREE PERSONS WHO WERE SEARCHED U/S 132, IT BECOMES APPARENT THAT NO SATISFACTION WAS RECORDED BY THE AO OF THE PERSONS SEARCHED BEFORE EMBARKING UPON THE ASSESSMENTS OF THE ASSESSEE. 7. AT THIS STAGE, WE WANT TO CLARIFY THAT CERTAIN CASES IN WHICH THE ASSESSMENTS WERE FRAMED U/S 153C OF THE ACT ON SOME ENTITIES PURSUANT TO SEARCH ON SH. B.K. DHINGRA, SMT. POONAM DHINGRA & M/S MADHUSUDAN BUILDCON PVT. LTD. IN IDENTICAL CIRCUMSTANCES, CAME UP FOR CONSIDERATION BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. IN ALL THESE CASES SIMILAR OBJECTIONS WERE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE TO THE EFFECT THAT NO PROPER SATISFACTION WAS RECORDED BY THE AO OF SUCH ASSESSEES. THE TRIBUNAL HAS DISPOSED OF SUCH CASES INCLUDING TANVIR COLLECTIONS PVT. LTD. VS. ACIT (ITA NO. 2421/DEL/2 014), DCIT VS. ITA NOS. 5986 DEL/ 2013 C.O. NOS. 329/D/2014 8 INLAY MARKETING PVT. LTD. (ITA NO. 4197/D/2012) AND MORE RECENTLY DCIT VS. G.S. FINDINGS & INVESTMENT PVT. LTD. (ITA NO. 5980/D/2013) BY UNIFORMLY HOLDING, INTER ALIA, AS UNDER : - I. THE RECORDING OF SATISFACTION BY THE AO HAVING JURISDICTI ON OVER THE PERSONS SEARCHED IS AN ESSENTIAL AND PRE - REQUISITE CONDITION FOR GIVING JURISDICTION TO THE AO OF THE OTHER PERSON . II. SUCH SATISFACTION IS REQUIRED TO BE RECORDED BY THE AO OF THE PERSONS SEARCHED AND NOT THE OTHER PERSON . III. ASSESSMENTS MADE WI THOUT RECORDING PROPER SATISFACTION ARE NULL AND VOID. IV. EVEN IF THE AO OF THE PERSONS SEARCHED AND THE OTHER PERSON IS SAME, IT IS ONLY THE AO OF THE PERSONS SEARCHED WHO IS OBLIGED TO RECORD SATISFACTION IN HIS CAPACITY AS THE AO OF THE PERSON SEARCHED. 8. AFTER CONSIDERING THE ARGUMENTS MADE BY BOTH THE SIDES, ON THE LINES SIMILAR TO THOSE WHICH HAVE BEEN MADE BEFORE US ALSO, THE TRIBUNAL IN THE ABOVE ORDERS HAS QUASHED THE ASSESSMENTS SO MADE BY DECLARING THEM VOID AB INITIO FOR LACK OF PROPER JURISDI CTION. 9. IT IS PERTINENT TO MENTION THAT THE SAME THREE PERSONS, VIZ., SH. B.K. DHINGRA, SMT. POONAM DHINGRA & M/S MADHUSUDAN BUILDCON PVT. LTD., WERE SEARCHED IN ALL THE ABOVE CASES AND THE AOS OF THOSE ASSESSEES RECORDED SATISFACTION IN THE SAME MA NNER AS HAS BEEN DONE IN THE INSTANT CASE. NO SATISFACTION WAS RECORDED BY THE AOS OF THE PERSONS SEARCHED. ALL THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE US ARE SIMILAR TO THOSE MADE IN THE ABOVE CASES. SINCE THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE IN THE FACTS AND LEGAL POSITION OF THE CASES UNDER CONSIDERATION VIS - A - VIS THOSE ALREADY CONSIDERED AND DECIDED BY THE TRIBUNAL, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE PRECEDENTS, WE SET ASIDE THE ASSESSMENT AND THE CONSEQUENTIAL IMPUGNED ORDERS ON THE GROUND OF LACK OF PROPER JURISDICTION OF THE AO. 10. BEFORE PARTING WITH THESE APPEALS, WE WOULD LIKE TO RECORD SOME FURTHER ARGUMENTS MADE BY THE LD. DR. SHE VEHEMENTLY ARGUED THAT THE APPRAISAL REPORT CLEARLY MENTIONS THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS TO BE TAXED U/S 153C ALONG WITH OTHER SEVERAL PERSONS AND THE PERSONS SEARCHED WERE LIABLE TO TAX U/S 153A. IN THIS VIEW OF THE MATTER, SHE CONTENDED THAT SUCH APPRAISAL REPORT SHOULD BE CONSIDERED AS DEPICTING A SATISFACTION. 11. WE ARE UNABLE TO ACCEPT THIS SUBMISSION BECAUSE AN APPRAISAL REPORT DOES NOT CONFE R JURISDICTION ON THE AO TO FRAME ASSESSMENT ON THE OTHER PERSONS . IT IS ONLY THE RECORDING OF PROPER SATISFACTION BY THE AO OF THE PERSON SEARCHED THAT THE DOCUMENTS FOUND FROM SUCH PERSON SEARCHED BELONG TO THE OTHER PERSON , THAT THE AO OF THE `OTH ER PERSON ACQUIRES JURISDICTION TO FRAME THE ASSESSMENT. APPRAISAL REPORT IS NO SUBSTITUTE OF SATISFACTION OF THE AO OF THE PERSON SEARCHED. 12. THE LD. DR FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE TRIBUNAL SHOULD NOT TAKE A HYPER TECHNICAL VIEW ON THE QUESTION OF REC ORDING SATISFACTION AND HENCE THE PROCEEDINGS SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO CONTINUE SINCE HUGE AMOUNTS ARE INVOLVED IN THE RACKET, WHICH WAS UNEARTHED BY THE SEARCH PARTY. ITA NOS. 5986 DEL/ 2013 C.O. NOS. 329/D/2014 9 13. WE DULY APPRECIATE THE CONCERN OF THE LD. DR FOR THE EXCHEQUER. BUT WE ARE REMINDED O F THE BASIC PRINCIPLE ENSHRINED IN ARTICLE 265 OF THE CONSTITUTION THAT NO TAX CAN BE COLLECTED WITHOUT AUTHORITY OF LAW. THERE CAN BE NO ASSESSMENT IN THE ABSENCE OF A PROPER JURISDICTION OF THE AUTHORITY. THE QUESTION OF JURISDICTION IS A VERY IMPORTANT ASPECT, WHICH CANNOT BE EQUATED WITH A TECHNICAL ISSUE. SIMILAR CONTENTION RAISED BY THE LD. DR HAS BEEN ELABORATELY DEALT WITH BY THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF TANVIR COLLECTIONS P. LTD. (SUPRA). WE, THEREFORE, DO NOT APPROVE THIS CONTENTION. 14. THE CO NTENTION OF THE LD. DR THAT THE HEARING OF THE INSTANT APPEALS BE BLOCKED BECAUSE THE REQUEST FOR THE CONSTITUTION OF SPECIAL BENCH IN KONNAR ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD. (ITA NO. 4141/DEL/2012 ETC.) IS PENDING CONSIDERATION, IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. IT CAN BE NOTICE D THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS UNIFORMALLY DECIDED THE ISSUE IN THE MANNER AS STATED ABOVE AND THERE IS NO CONFLICTING DECISION ON THE SET OF FACTS WHICH ARE UNDER CONSIDERATION. FURTHER, THE LD. AR HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ISSUE IN THE CASE OF KONNAR ENTERPRISES LTD. IS ENTIRELY DIFFERENT AND HAS NO BEARING TO THE FACTS OF THE INSTANT CASE. 15. THE NEXT CONTENTION URGED BY THE LD. DR IS THAT THE TRIBUNAL IN SOME OTHER CASES HAS HELD THAT WHERE THE AO OF THE PERSONS SEARCHED AND THE OTHER PERSON IS SAME, THEN TH ERE IS NO NEED TO RECORD SUCH SATISFACTION. THIS CONTENTION CANNOT BE COUNTENANCED BECAUSE THE SAME HAS BEEN REJECTED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN ALL THE ABOVE LISTED CASES. AS THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PRESENT CASE ARE IDENTICAL WITH THOSE OF TANVIR COL LECTIONS AND INLAY ETC., IN WHICH SUCH CONTENTION HAS NOT FOUND FAVOUR WITH THE TRIBUNAL, WE PREFER TO GO WITH A VIEW TAKEN BY THE TRIBUNAL IN THESE DECISIONS. 16. AS REGARDS THE PROPOSAL OF THE REVENUE TO FILE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF TAN VIR COLLECTION, WE FIND THAT NO SUCH MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION HAS SO FAR BEEN FILED. FURTHER, THE CONTENTION THAT THE ORDER IN THE CASE OF INLAY MARKETING IS PER INCURIUM, HAS BEEN DEALT WITH BY THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF TANVIR COLLECTION, BY HOLDING T HAT THERE IS NO FLAW IN SUCH ORDER. 17. THE OTHER OBJECTIONS TAKEN BY THE LD. DR IN HER WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS ARE NOTHING BUT REITERATION OF THE POINTS ARGUED EARLIER, WHICH HAVE BEEN ELABORATELY DEALT WITH IN THE ABOVE REFERRED TRIBUNAL ORDERS. 18. IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING DISCUSSION AND RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE ABOVE TRIBUNAL ORDERS, WE SET ASIDE THE ASSESSMENT AND THE IMPUGNED ORDERS FOR THE REASON THAT THE AO OF THE PERSONS SEARCHED, NAMELY, SH. B.K. DHINGRA, SMT. POONAM DHINGRA & M/S MADHUSUDAN BUILDCON PVT. LTD. DID NOT RECORD ANY SATISFACTION THAT SOME MONEY, BULLION, JEWELLERY OR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OR OTHER DOCUMENTS FOUND FROM THESE PERSONS BELONGED TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ABSENCE OF SUCH SATISFACTION, IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, DID NOT TRANSLATE INTO CONFERRING A VALID AND LAWFUL JURISDICTION TO THE AO OF THE ASSESSEE TO PROCEED WITH THE MATTER OF ASSESSMENT U/S 153C OF THE ACT FOR ALL THE YEARS UNDER CONSIDERATION. 19. IN VIEW OF OUR DECISION ON THE ABOVE PRELIMINARY LEGAL ISSUE, THERE IS NO NE ED TO EXAMINE THE OTHER LEGAL ISSUES RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE OR THE MERITS OF THE CASE AS CONTESTED IN THE PRESENT APPEALS. 20. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED AND THOSE OF THE REVENUE ARE DISMISSED . ITA NOS. 5986 DEL/ 2013 C.O. NOS. 329/D/2014 10 1 3 . IN THE C ASE OF M/S . AAKASH AROGYA MINDIR P. LTD V. DCIT (SUPRA), THE EARLIER BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL HAD FOLLOWED THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF PEPSI FOODS P. LTD V. ACIT (SIC) PEPSICO INDIA HOLDING PVT. LTD V. ACIT [SOURCE: PARA 6 ON PAGE 6 OF THE ORDER DT.28.11.2014]. 1 4 . IN THE LIGHT OF THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF PEPSI CO INDIA HOLDING PVT . LTD V. ACIT (SUPRA) AND ALSO THE FINDINGS OF THE EARLIER BENCHES OF THIS TRIBUNAL (SUPRA), WE HOLD THAT SINCE THERE WAS NO SATISFACTION NOTE BY THE AO OF SEARCHED PERSON PRIOR TO INITIATION OF PROCEEDINGS U/S 153C OF THE ACT, THE ASSESSMENTS CONCLUDED ON THE ASSESS E E U/S 153C OF THE ACT R.W.S 153A OF THE ACT LACK JURISDICTION AND THE SAME ARE HEREBY QUASHE D. 1 5 . IN SUBSTANCE, THE GROUND NO.1 OF THE ASSESSEE S C.OS IS ALLOWED. SINCE THE C.O OF THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED, THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE IN ITS APPEALS WITH REFERENCE TO THE MERITS OF THE CASE ARE NOT ADJUDICATED. 1 6 . IN THE RESULT: (I ) THE ASSESSEE S C.OS FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2003 - 04 TO 2008 - 09 ARE PARTLY ALLOWED AS INDICATED ABOVE; & (II) THE REVENUE S APPEALS ARE NOT ADJUDICATED AND HENCE DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS, SINCE THE ASSESSMENT ORDERS PASSED U/S 153C R.W.S. 153A OF THE ACT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2003 - 04 TO 2008 - 09 WERE QUASHED. TH E DECISION WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 18 TH MARCH , 201 5 . SD/ - SD/ - ( N.K. SAINI ) (GEORGE GEORGE K.) A CCOUNTANT MEMBER J UDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 18 TH MARCH , 201 5 . AKS/ - ITA NOS. 5986 DEL/ 2013 C.O. NOS. 329/D/2014 11 COPY FORWARDED TO 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR ASST . REGIS TRAR, ITAT, NEW DELHI