M/s Devi Dayal Petro Chemicals Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi V. DCIT, New Delhi

CO 84/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 122 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9836 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Cross Objection
• Pronouncement Date: 10-09-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 08-09-2014
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 25-03-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR SUDHA KUMARI
• Keywords: Document seized; Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice; Assessment record; Documents seized
• Section: 69C; 143(3); 153A; 68; 132

Judgement Text

ITA NOS. 5430-5436/DEL/2013 & CO NOS. 83-88/DEL/201 4 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH B, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NOS. 5430 TO 5436/DEL/2013 A.Y RS . : 2003 - 04 TO 2009-10 DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 21, ROOM NO. 344, E-2, ARA CENTRE, JHANDEWALAN EXTN., NEW DELHI-55 VS. M/S DEVI DAYAL PETRO CHEMICALS PVT. LTD., LANE W-17A, HOUSE NO. 18, WESTERN AVENUE, SAINIK FARM (SOUTH), NEW DELHI (PAN:- AACCD2454J) (APPELLANT) (APPELLANT) (APPELLANT) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) AND AND AND AND C.O. NOS. 83 TO 88/DEL/2014 (IN ITA NOS. 5430 TO 5435/DEL/2013 A.Y RS . : 2003 - 04 TO 2008-09 M/S DEVI DAYAL PETRO CHEMICALS PVT. LTD., LANE W-17A, HOUSE NO. 18, WESTERN AVENUE, SAINIK FARM (SOUTH), NEW DELHI (PAN: - AACCD2454J) VS. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-21, ROOM NO. 344, E-2, ARA CENTRE, JHANDEWALAN EXTN., NEW DELHI-55 (APPELLANT) (APPELLANT) (APPELLANT) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) DEPARTMENT BY : DR. SUDHA KUMARI, CIT(DR) ASSESSEE BY : MR. KAPIL GOEL, ADV. DATE OF HEARING DATE OF HEARING DATE OF HEARING DATE OF HEARING : 08 : 08 : 08 : 08- -- -09 0909 09- -- -2014 2014 2014 2014 DATE OF ORDER : .... DATE OF ORDER : .... DATE OF ORDER : .... DATE OF ORDER : ....- -- -09 0909 09- -- -2014 2014 2014 2014 ITA NOS. 5430-5436/DEL/2013 & CO NOS. 83-88/DEL/201 4 2 ORDER ORDER ORDER ORDER PER BENCH: PER BENCH: PER BENCH: PER BENCH:- -- - THESE ARE THE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE AND CROSS OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE EMANATE OUT OF THE SEPARATE ORDERS PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A)-II, NEW DELHI PERTA INING TO RESPECTIVE ASSESSMENT YEARS. SINCE SOME OF THE ISSUES INVOLVED IN THESE APPEALS AS WELL AS CROSS OBJECTIONS ARE CO MMON, WE ARE THEREFORE, PROCEEDING TO DISPOSE THEM OFF BY THIS C ONSOLIDATED ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. THE GROUNDS RAISED IN THE REVENUES APPEAL ARE MORE OR LESS SAME EXCEPT DIFFERENCE IN THE FIGURES, HENCE, WE ARE ADJUDICATING THE REVENUES APPEAL WI TH REFERENCE TO ITA NO. 5430/DEL/2013 (A.Y. 2003-04) AND ADJUDICATI NG ASSESSEES CROSS OBJECTION WITH REFERENCE TO CO NO. 83/DEL/201 4 (A.Y. 2003- 04). 2. THE GROUNDS RAISED IN THE REVENUES APPEAL READ AS UNDER:- 1. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS OF THE CASE IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 35,08,525/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED PURCHASE U/S. 69C OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 AND IN DIRECTING THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO CONSIDER ONLY THE ADDITION OF THE PEAK OF FINANCIAL TRANSACTIONS. 2. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS OF THE CASE IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 1,64,550/- MAD E BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER BY WAY OF DISALLOWANCE OF 50% OF EXPENSES CLAIMED AND IN DIRECTING THE ITA NOS. 5430-5436/DEL/2013 & CO NOS. 83-88/DEL/201 4 3 ASSESSING OFFICER TO CONSIDER ONLY THE ADDITION OF THE PEAK OF FINANCIAL TRANSACTIONS. 3. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS OF THE CASE IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 98,000/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF INCREASE IN SHARE CAPITAL U/S. 68 OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 AND IN DIRECTING THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO CONSIDER ONLY T HE ADDITION OF THE PEAK OF FINANCIAL TRANSACTIONS. 4. (A) THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS ERRONEOUS AND NOT TENABLE IN LAW AND ON FACTS. (B) THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER OR AMEND ANY / ALL OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE OR DURING THE COURSE OF THE HEARING OF THE APPEAL. 3. THE GROUNDS RAISED IN THE ASSESSEES CROSS OBJEC TION READ AS UNDER:- 1. THAT THE CIT(A) HAS FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND THE PROVISIONS OF THE LAW, THE PROCEEDINGS INITIATED UL S 153C IS ILLEGAL, BAD IN LAW AND WITHOUT JURISDICTIO N AND AS SUCH THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED IN CONSEQUENCE THEREOF IS ILLEGAL, BAD IN LAW AND WITHOUT JURISDICTION, BARRED BY LIMITATION AND AGAI NST THE PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE, 2. THAT IN VIEW OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF T HE CASE AND THE PROVISION OF LAW THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN ISSUING NOTICE ULS 153C AND ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE AO IS ILLEGAL, BAD I N LAW, BARRED BY LIMITATION AND WITHOUT JURISDICTION. ITA NOS. 5430-5436/DEL/2013 & CO NOS. 83-88/DEL/201 4 4 3. THAT THE CIT(A) HAS FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT ASSESSMENT FRAMED IS AGAINST THE SCHEME OF THE ACT WHEREBY THE REASSESSMENT 153C IN SUCH CASES IS TO BE CONFINED TO THE ADDITIONS AND DISALLOWANCES CONSEQUENT TO THE MATERIAL FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF THE SEARCH THE ADDITIONS WHICH ARE NOT BASED ON ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIAL FOUND DURING SEARCH ARE LIABLE TO DELETED. 4. THAT IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY INCRIMINATING MATERI AL FOUND DURING SEARCH, THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE AO WHILE COMPLETING ASSESSMENT ULS 153C RWS 153A/143(3) ARE UNJUST, ARBITRARY, AND BAD IN LAW AND WITHOUT JURISDICTION. 5. THAT IN VIEW OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN HOLDING THAT THE AUDITED BOOKS AND TRANSACTIONS THROUGH BANK NOTWITHSTANDING, THE BOOK RESULTS ARE REQUIRED TO BE REJECTED, SINCE THE ENTRIES ARE ARTIFICIAL, SHAM AND NOT REFLECTIVE OF ACTUAL BUSIN ESS I COMMERCIAL TRANSACTIONS. 6. THAT THE CIT (A) HAS FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE VARIOU S OBSERVATIONS AND FINDINGS OF THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDER ARE IRRELEVANT AND VITIATED IN THE LAW. 7. THAT IN VIEW OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DISREGARDING THE PURCHASE, THE SALES AND THE EXPENSES CLAIMED BY THE APPELLANT. ITA NOS. 5430-5436/DEL/2013 & CO NOS. 83-88/DEL/201 4 5 8. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E THE INTEREST CHARGED U/S 234A AND 234 B HAS BEEN WRONGLY AND ILLEGALLY CHARGED AND IN ANY CASE IS HIGHLY EXCESSIVE. 9. THAT THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD HAVE NOT BEEN PROPERLY CONSIDERED AND JUDICIALLY INTERPRETED AND THE SAME DO NOT JUSTIFY THE ADDITIO N MADE. 10. THAT THE ADDITION MADE IS BASED ON MERE SURMISES AND CONJECTURES AND THE SAME CANNOT BE JUSTIFIED BY ANY MATERIAL ON RECORD AND THE SAME ARE HIGHLY EXCESSIVE. 11. THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES THE RIGHT TO AMEND, APPEND, DELETE ANY OR ALL GROUNDS OF APPEAL. 4. BRIEFLY STATED THE FACTS ARE THAT A SEARCH AND S EIZURE ACTION U/S 132 OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 WAS CARRIED OUT IN THE CA SES OF SH. BK DHINGRA, SMT. POONAM DHINGRA AND M/S MADHUSUDAN BUI LDCON PVT. LTD. ON 20.10.2008 AND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH AT THEIR RESIDENTIAL PREMISES AT F-6/5, VASANT VIHAR, NEW DE LHI CERTAIN DOCUMENTS BELONGING TO THE ASSESSEE WERE SEIZED. ON THE BASIS OF DOCUMENTS SO FOUND BELONGING TO THE ASSESSEE COMPAN Y, PROCEEDINGS WERE INITIATED IN THE CASE OF THE ASSES SEE COMPANY U/S. 153C READ WITH SECTION 153A OF THE I.T. ACT. THE CASE INITIALLY CENTRALIZED WITH THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-17, NEW D ELHI AND SUBSEQUENTLY TRANSFERRED TO CENTRAL CIRCLE-21 BY AN ORDER DATED 19.10.2010 U/S. 127 OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961. IN RESPO NSE TO NOTICE U/S. 153C, THE ASSESSEE FILED A RETURN FOR ASSESSMENT YE AR 2003-04 ON 8.9.2010 DECLARING ITS INCOME. THEREAFTER, NOTICES U/S. 142(1)/143(2) DATED 1.11.2010 ALONGWITH THE DETAILED QUESTIONNAIR E WERE ISSUED ITA NOS. 5430-5436/DEL/2013 & CO NOS. 83-88/DEL/201 4 6 AND SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE FIXING THE CASE FOR 10 .11.2010. IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICES, AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE ATTENDED THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS FROM TIME TO TIME, FURNISHED CERTAIN DETAILS AND BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS WERE ALSO PRODUCED. ON GOING THROUGH THE DETAILS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, THE ASSESSING OFFICE R ASSESSED AN INCOME OF RS. 37,68,450/- VIDE HIS ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 31.12.2010 PASSED UNDER SECTION 153C/ 143(3) OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961. 5. AGAINST THE AFORESAID ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 31. 12.2010 PASSED UNDER SECTION 153C/143(3) OF THE I.T. ACT, 1 961, ASSESSEE APPEALED BEFORE THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, WHO VIDE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 19.7.2013 PARTLY ALLOWED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 6. AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 19.7.2013 OF THE LD. CIT (A), REVENUE FILED AN APPEAL AND ASSESSEE FILED CROSS OBJECTION BEFORE US. 7. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSE SSEE, SH. KAPIL GOEL HAS STATED THAT ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE CROSS OBJECTIONS CHALLENGING THE PROCEEDINGS INITIATED U/S. 153C OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 BEING ILLEGAL, BAD IN LAW AND WITHOUT JUR ISDICTION AND AS SUCH THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED IN CONSEQUENCE THE REOF IS ILLEGAL, BAD IN LAW AND WITHOUT JURISDICTION, BARRED BY LIMI TATION AND AGAINST THE PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE. LD. COUNSEL OF T HE ASSESSEE FURTHER STATED THAT ASSESSMENT FRAMED IS AGAINST THE SCHEME OF THE ACT WHEREBY THE REASSESSMENT U/S. 153C IN SUCH CASES IS TO BE CONFINED TO THE ADDITIONS AND DISALLOWANCES CONSEQUENT TO TH E MATERIAL FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF THE SEARCH. THE ADDITIONS WH ICH ARE NOT BASED ON ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIAL FOUND DURING SEARCH ARE LIABLE TO BE DELETED. HE ALSO SUBMITTED THAT THE REVENUE AUTHO RITIES HAVE ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN HOLDING THAT THE AUDITED BOO KS AND TRANSACTIONS THROUGH BANK NOWITHSTANDING, THE BOOK RESULTS ARE ITA NOS. 5430-5436/DEL/2013 & CO NOS. 83-88/DEL/201 4 7 REQUIRED TO BE REJECTED, SINCE THE ENTRIES ARE ARTI FICIAL, SHAM AND NOT REFLECTIVE OF ACTUAL BUSINESS / COMMERCIAL TRANSACT IONS. LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE FILED A PAPER BOOK HAVING PAGES 1 T 27 CONTAINING THE ASSESSMENT RECORDS ETC. AND DRAW OUR ATTENTION TOWARDS THE PAGE NO. 1 OF THE SAME PAPER BOOK VIZ. SATISFACTION NOTE DATED 5.7.2010 FOR ISSUING NOTICE U/S. 153C O F THE I.T. ACT, 1961 TO THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2003- 04 TO 2008-09 AND STATED THAT DOCUMENTS AT PAGES 1 TO 25 OF ANN EXURE A-25 SEIZED BY THE DEPARTMENT ARE THE CHEQUE BOOK WHICH ARE NOT RELATED TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 TO 2008-09 AND ALSO SUBMITTED THAT THE SAME HAS ALREADY BEEN ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS BY THE ASSESSEE. HE ALSO DRAW OUR ATTENTION TOWARDS THE DECISION DATED 29.3.2012 OF THE HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT DELIVERED IN THE CASE OF SSP AVIATION LTD. VS. DEPUTY SSP AVIATION LTD. VS. DEPUTY SSP AVIATION LTD. VS. DEPUTY SSP AVIATION LTD. VS. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TA COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TA COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TA COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX [2012] 346 ITR 177 (DELH I) X [2012] 346 ITR 177 (DELHI) X [2012] 346 ITR 177 (DELHI) X [2012] 346 ITR 177 (DELHI) IN SUPPORT OF ITS CASE. LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE ALSO SUB MITTED THAT THE VIEW TAKEN BY THE HONBLE HIGH COURT IS FORTIFIED BY THE LEGISLATIVE AMENDMENT MADE BY THE FINANCE ACT, 2014 IN SECTION 153C OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. ACCORDINGLY, LD. COUNSEL O F THE ASSESSEE REQUESTED THAT THE ISSUES INVOLVE IN THE ASSESSEES CROSS OBJECTIONS AND IN THE REVENUES APPEALS MAY BE SET ASIDE TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO VERIFY WHETHER THE SEIZED DOCUMENTS MENTIONED IN THE SATISFACTION NOTE DATED 5.7.2010 RELATING TO THE A SSESSEE ON WHICH NOTICE U/S. 153C HAS BEEN ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE AN D IF THESE DOCUMENTS NAMELY THE CHEQUES HAVE ALREADY BEEN ACC OUNTED FOR IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE AND ARE NOT RELATING TO THE PERIOD I.E. ASSTT. YEAR 2003-04 TO 2008-09, THEN TH E PROCEEDINGS U/S. 153C MAY BE CANCELLED, OTHERWISE, THE ASSESSING OFF ICER MAY TAKE ACTION, AS PER LAW. ITA NOS. 5430-5436/DEL/2013 & CO NOS. 83-88/DEL/201 4 8 8. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. DEPARTMENT REPRESENTATIV E RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND SHE OPPOSE THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEES COUNSEL. 9. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE COUNSEL AND PERUSED THE R ECORDS. WE HAVE ALSO GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTH ORITIES, PAPER BOOK FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE CASE LAW RELIED UPON BY THE ASSESSEE. WE FIND THAT LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSE E FILED A PAPER BOOK HAVING PAGES 1 TO 27 CONTAINING THE ASSESS MENT RECORDS ETC. AND HE DRAWN OUR ATTENTION TOWARDS THE PAGE NO. 1 O F THE SAME PAPER BOOK VIZ. SATISFACTION NOTE DATED 5.7.2010, THE SAME IS REPRODUCED HERE-BELOW:- SATISFACTION NOTE FOR ISSUING NOTICE U/S. 153C OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 IN THE CASE OF M/S DEVI DAYAL PETRO CHEMI CALS PVT. LTD., LANE W-17-A, HOUSE NO. 18, WESTERN AVENU E, SAINIK FARM SOUTH, NEW DELHI, AACCD454J FOR A.Y. 20 03- 04 TO 2008-09. 05/7/2010 DOCUMENTS AT PAGES 1 TO 25 OF ANNEXURE A-25 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. BK DHINGRA, SMT. POONAM DHINGRA, M/S MADHUSUDAN BUILDCON PVT. LTD. HAVE BEEN FOUND TO BELONG TO M/S DEVI DAYAL PETRO CHEMICALS PVT. LTD., LANE W-17-A, HOUSE NO. 18, WESTERN AVENUE, SAINIK FARM SOUTH, NEW DELHI WHICH HAS NOT BEEN COVERED U/S. 132 OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961. ACCORDINGLY, IN TERMS OF PROVISIONS OF SECTION 143C OF THE ACT, NOTICES U/S. ITA NOS. 5430-5436/DEL/2013 & CO NOS. 83-88/DEL/201 4 9 153C ARE HEREBY ISSUED FOR THE A.Y. 2003-04 TO 200809 IN THE CASE OF M/S DEVI DAYAL PETRO CHEMICALS PVT. LTD.. THE CASE WAS CENTRALIZED IN THE CENTRAL CIRCLE-17, NEW DELHI VIDE ORDERS DATED 14.12.2009 OF CIT-IV, NEW DELHI. SD/- DATED 5.7.10 DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-17, NEW 9.1 IT WAS CONTENDED BY THE LEARNED COUNSEL THAT TH E DOCUMENTS MENTIONED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE SATISFACT ION NOTE I.E. DOCUMENTS AT PAGES 1 TO 25 OF ANNEXURE A-5 ARE ONLY THE COUNTERFOIL OF THE CHEQUE BOOK WHICH IS DULY ACCOUNTED FOR IN T HE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. HE HAD ALSO CONTENDED THAT THE COUNTERFOI L BELONGED TO THE YEAR 2008-09 AND, THEREFORE, THE PROCEEDINGS UN DER SECTION 153C COULD NOT HAVE BEEN INITIATED FOR THE YEARS TO WHICH THE DOCUMENTS DO NOT BELONG AND EVEN AFTER INITIATING P ROCEEDINGS TO THE YEAR TO WHICH THE DOCUMENTS BELONGED, THE ASSES SING OFFICER OUGHT TO HAVE DROPPED THE PROCEEDINGS BECAUSE ALL T RANSACTIONS REFLECTED BY THE COUNTERFOILS BY THE CHEQUES IS DUL Y ACCOUNTED FOR. IN SUPPORT OF THIS CONTENTION, HE HAD RELIED UPON T HE DECISION OF HON'BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF SS P AVIATION LTD. 346 ITR 177. AT PAGE 189 OF THE REPORT IN PARAGRAP H 17, THEIR LORDSHIPS HELD AS UNDER:- THE SECTION MERELY ENABLES THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES TO INVESTIGATE INTO THE CONTENTS OF THE DOCUMENT SEIZE D, WHICH BELONGS TO A PERSON OTHER THAN THE PERSON SEARCHED SO THAT IT CAN BE ASCERTAINED WHETHER THE TRANSACTION OR THE INCOME EMBEDDED IN THE DOCUMENT HAS BEEN ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE CASE OF THE APPROPRIA TE PERSON. IT IS AIMED AT ENSURING THAT INCOME DOES N OT ITA NOS. 5430-5436/DEL/2013 & CO NOS. 83-88/DEL/201 4 10 ESCAPE ASSESSMENT IN THE HANDS OF ANY OTHER PERSON MERELY BECAUSE HE HAS NOT BEEN SEARCHED UNDER SECTI ON 132 OF THE ACT. IT IS ONLY A FIRST STEP TO THE ENQ UIRY, WHICH IS TO FOLLOW. THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHO HAS SEARCH ED THE SATISFACTION THAT THE DOCUMENT RELATES TO A PERSON OTHER THAN THE SEARCHED PERSON CAN DO NOTHING EXCEPT TO FORWARD THE DOCUMENT TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAVIN G JURISDICTION OVER THE OTHER PERSON AND THEREAFTER I T IS FOR THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAVING JURISDICTION OVER THE OTHER PERSON TO FOLLOW THE PROCEDURE PRESCRIBED BY SECTIO N 153A IN AN ATTEMPT TO ENSURE THAT THE INCOME REFLEC TED BY THE DOCUMENT HAS BEEN ACCOUNTED FOR BY SUCH OTHE R PERSON. IF HE IS SO SATISFIED AFTER OBTAINING THE RETURNS FROM SUCH OTHER PERSON FOR THE SIX ASSESSMENT YEARS , THE PROCEEDINGS WILL HAVE TO BE CLOSED. IF THE RETURNS FILED BY THE OTHER PERSON FOR THE PERIOD OF SIX YEARS DOES N OT SHOW THAT THE INCOME REFLECTED IN THE DOCUMENT HAS BEEN ACCOUNTED FOR, ADDITIONS WILL BE ACCORDINGLY MADE A FTER FOLLOWING THE PROCEDURE PRESCRIBED BY LAW AND AFTER GIVING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO SUCH OTHER PERSON. THAT, IN SUM AND SUBSTANCE, IS THE POSITIO N. 9.2 CONSIDERING THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND THE AR GUMENTS OF BOTH THE SIDES, WE SET ASIDE THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF T HE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR RE-EXAMINATION OF THE ISSUE IN THE LIGHT OF THE ABOVE DECISION OF HON'BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT I.E., THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER WILL FIRST VERIFY THE YEARS TO WHICH THE SEIZED DOCUMENTS BELO NGED. THERE WOULD BE NO JUSTIFICATION FOR CONTINUATION OF THE P ROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 153C TO WHICH THE SEIZED DOCUMENTS DO NOT B ELONG. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER WILL DROP THE PROC EEDINGS INITIATED UNDER SECTION 153 OF THE YEARS TO WHICH THE SEIZED DOCUMENTS DO NOT BELONG. FOR THE YEAR TO WHICH THE SEIZED DOCUM ENTS BELONGED, HE WILL VERIFY WHETHER THE TRANSACTION REFLECTED BY THE SEIZED DOCUMENTS ARE DULY ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE BOOKS OF AC COUNT. IF THE TRANSACTIONS ARE DULY ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT, AS CONTENDED BY THE LEARNED COUNSEL, THE ASSESSING OFF ICER WILL DROP ITA NOS. 5430-5436/DEL/2013 & CO NOS. 83-88/DEL/201 4 11 THE PROCEEDINGS INITIATED UNDER SECTION 153C. HOWE VER, IF FOR THE YEAR TO WHICH THE SEIZED DOCUMENTS BELONGED, THE TR ANSACTION REFLECTED BY THE SEIZED DOCUMENTS IS NOT RECORDED I N THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT, THE PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 153C WILL CO NTINUE AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER WILL MAKE THE ASSESSMENT AFRESH I N ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. SINCE WE HAVE SET ASIDE ALL THE YEARS UN DER APPEAL, THE REVENUES APPEALS ON MERITS DO NOT REQUIRE ANY ADJU DICATION AND THEY ARE ALSO DEEMED TO BE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. THE ASSESSING OFFICER WILL PROCEED TO MAKE THE ASSESSME NT AFRESH ONLY IN THE YEAR WHERE PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 153C CAN V ALIDLY CONTINUE IN THE LIGHT OF THE ABOVE DECISION OF HON'BLE JURIS DICTIONAL HIGH COURT. 10. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE CROSS OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND ALL THE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE STANDS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT 10-9-2014. SD/ SD/ SD/ SD/- -- - SD/ SD/ SD/ SD/- -- - [ [[ [G.D. AGRAWAL G.D. AGRAWAL G.D. AGRAWAL G.D. AGRAWAL] ]] ] [ [[ [H.S. SIDHU H.S. SIDHU H.S. SIDHU H.S. SIDHU] ]] ] VICE PRESIDENT VICE PRESIDENT VICE PRESIDENT VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL JUDICIAL JUDICIAL JUDICIAL MEMBER MEMBER MEMBER MEMBER DATE 10/9/2014 SRBHATNAGAR SRBHATNAGAR SRBHATNAGAR SRBHATNAGAR COPY FORWARDED TO: COPY FORWARDED TO: COPY FORWARDED TO: COPY FORWARDED TO: - -- - 1. APPELLANT - 2. RESPONDENT - 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, DELHI BENCHES ITA NOS. 5430-5436/DEL/2013 & CO NOS. 83-88/DEL/201 4 12