Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Panaji V. M/s Golden Peace Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd, Porvorim

ITA 26/PAN/2023

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 100 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3610 (ITAT-PANAJI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-02-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: WT(D)
• Next Hearing Date: 10-12-2023
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 05-02-2023
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P.S. SHIVSHANKAR
• Section: 153C

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH : PANAJI [THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING AT INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL : PUNE BENCHES : PUNE BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. DIPAK RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.Nos.26, 27 & 45/PAN./2023 AND C.O.Nos.3, 4 & 5/PAN./2023 Assessment Years 2016-17 to 2018-19 The ACIT, Central Circle, Pundalik Niwas, Rue De Ourem, Panaji Goa – 403 001. vs. M/s. Golden Peace Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Plot No.104/1A, Opp. Azad Bhavan, Porvorim, Goa. PAN AAECG8512A (Appellant) (Respondent/Cross Objector) For Assessee : Shri Neeraj Mangla For Revenue : Shri P.S. Shivshankar, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 14.02.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 28.02.2024 ORDER PER BENCH : These Revenue’s three appeals ITA.Nos.26, 27 & 45/ PAN./2023 with assessee’s as many cross objections i.e., C.O.Nos.3, 4 & 5/PAN./2023 therein, arise against the CIT(A)-2, Panaji's as many Dins and order nos.ITBA/APL/M/250/2022-23/1047149657(1); 1047149728(1); 1047899915(1); dated 09.11.2022 for assessment years 2016-17 and 2017-18 and 09.12.2022 for assessment year 2018- 19; in proceedings u/sec.143(3) r.w.s. 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short "the Act"). We have heard both the parties at length. Case files perused. 2 ITA.Nos.26, 27 & Cos.3, 4 & 5 /PAN./2023 & ITA.No.45/PAN./2023 2. These Revenue’s three appeals ITA.Nos.26, 27 & 45/PAN./2023 plead the following identical substantive grounds : 2.1. The assessee’s as many cross objections C.O.Nos.3, 4 & 5/PAN./2023 raise the following identical grounds : 3 ITA.Nos.26, 27 & Cos.3, 4 & 5 /PAN./2023 & ITA.No.45/PAN./2023 3. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the vehement rival stands regarding validity of the impugned sec.153C assessments. Learned CIT(A) has quashed the same for the reason that the common search herein dated 24.10.2017 carried-out in case of Shri Brijesh Kumar Anand and Shri Rakesh Kumar Agarwal [working as casino Junket operators] had not found/seized any incriminating material belonging, pertaining or relating to the assessee herein under clauses (a) and (b) thereto, as the case may be. 4. Learned CIT-DR vehemently argued that the CIT(A) herein has erred in law and on facts in quashing these three assessments despite the fact that the Assessing Officer’s sec.153C satisfactions had been rightly recorded so as to initiate the impugned proceedings. We note in this factual backdrop that the assessee’s paper book pages 10 to 25 containing compilation of the corresponding seized material itself wherein the clinching name of the concerned party found as “Pride-1” which made the learned Assessing Officer to initiate sec.153C proceedings in these three assessment years. 5. The assessee pleaded from the very beginning that the said seized material was never related to its business venture run in the name and style of “Pride-II” as against “Pride-1” hereinabove. This made the learned CIT(A) to seek a remand report from the Assessing Officer which forms part of the identical lower appellate 4 ITA.Nos.26, 27 & Cos.3, 4 & 5 /PAN./2023 & ITA.No.45/PAN./2023 discussion in all these cases. Learned CIT(A) has thereafter quashed all the impugned assessments dated 30.05.2022 as under : 5 ITA.Nos.26, 27 & Cos.3, 4 & 5 /PAN./2023 & ITA.No.45/PAN./2023 6 ITA.Nos.26, 27 & Cos.3, 4 & 5 /PAN./2023 & ITA.No.45/PAN./2023 7 ITA.Nos.26, 27 & Cos.3, 4 & 5 /PAN./2023 & ITA.No.45/PAN./2023 8 ITA.Nos.26, 27 & Cos.3, 4 & 5 /PAN./2023 & ITA.No.45/PAN./2023 9 ITA.Nos.26, 27 & Cos.3, 4 & 5 /PAN./2023 & ITA.No.45/PAN./2023 6. The Revenue could hardly rebut all these clinching facts during the course of hearing before us i.e., the seized incriminating material during the course of search could not be taken as “belonging” or “pertaining” or “relating” to the assessee so as to satisfy the rigor of sec.153C of the Act. That being the case, we quote hon’ble apex court’s recent decision DCIT vs. UK Paints (Overseas) Ltd., [2023] 454 ITR 441 (SC) to conclude that the CIT(A) 10 ITA.Nos.26, 27 & Cos.3, 4 & 5 /PAN./2023 & ITA.No.45/PAN./2023 has rightly quashed all these assessments thereby holding that the seized material taken note of by the Assessing Officer was only regarding “Pride-1” than the assessee’s business venture “Pride-2”. These Revenue’s grounds as well as it’s main appeals ITA.Nos.26, 27 & 45/PAN./2023 fail in very terms. Ordered accordingly. 7. Assessee’s as many cross objections C.O.Nos.3, 4 & 5/ PAN./2023 raising the very legal issue are declared as rendered infructuous as per our foregoing detailed findings. All other rival pleadings in these three Revenue’s appeal and assessee’s cross objections each stand rendered academic. 8. These Revenue’s three appeals ITA.Nos.26, 27 & 45/PAN./ 2023 are dismissed and assessee’s cross objections C.O.Nos.3, 4 & 5/PAN./2023 herein are dismissed as infructuous in above terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files. Order pronounced in the open Court on 28.02.2024. Sd/- Sd/- [DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE] [SATBEER SINGH GODARA] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Pune, Dated 28 th February, 2024 VBP/- Copy to 1. The applicant 2. The respondent 3. The CIT(A)-2, 3 rd Floor, Pundalik Niwas, Rua De Ourem, Panaji, Goa – 403 001. 4. The Addl. CIT, (Central Range), Panaji. 5. The D.R. ITAT, Panaji Bench, Panaji 6. Guard File. //By Order// //True Copy // Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Pune Benches, Pune