Sh. Rajiv Kumar, Mohali V. ACIT, Chandigarh

ITA 41/CHANDI/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3824 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 year(s) 11 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-12-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 21-07-2016
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 13-01-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAVI SARANGA L
• Keywords: Search and seizure
• Section: 143(3); 153A; 132; 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCHES, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SH. N. K. SAINI, AM AND SH. RAVISH SOOD, JM ITA NO. 41/CHD./2011 : ASSTT. YE AR : 2007-08 SH. RAJIV KUMAR, HOUSE NO. 123, PHASE-3B1, MOHALI VS ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. AFYPK8488H ITA NO. 1327/CHD./2010 : ASSTT. YEAR : 2007-08 SH. SOHAN LAL ARORA, HOUSE NO. 123, PHASE-3B1, MOHALI VS ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. ACLPA9483C ITA NO. 1422/CHD./2010 : ASSTT. YEAR : 2007-08 DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH VS SH. S. L. ARORA, # 123, PHASE-3B1, MOHALI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. ACLPA9483C ITA NO. 1427/CHD./2010 : ASSTT. YEAR : 2007-08 DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH VS KARAN EMPIRE PVT. LTD., # 123, PHASE-3B1, MOHALI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. AACCK7646P CO NO. 13/CHD./2011 : ASSTT. YEAR : 2007-08 KARAN EMPIRE PVT. LTD., # 123, PHASE-3B1, MOHALI VS DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. AACCK7646P ASSESSEE BY : SH. PARIKSHIT AGGARWAL, CA REVENUE BY : SH. RAVI SARANGAL, CIT DR DATE OF HEARING : 21.12.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 22.12.2016 ITA NOS. 1327, 1422 & 1427/CHD./2010 ITA NO. 41 & CO. 13/CHD./2011 RAJIV KUMAR, SOHAN LAL, KARAN EMPIRE 2 ORDER PER N. K. SAINI, AM: THE APPEALS BY THE DEPARTMENT AND CROSS OBJECTION B Y THE ASSESSEE IN THE CASE OF M/S KARAN EMPIRE PVT. L TD., MOHALI AND SH. S. L. ARORA, MOHALI ARE DIRECTED AGA INST THE SEPARATE ORDERS EACH DATED 17.09.2010 OF THE LD. C IT(A)-1, LUDHIANA AND THE APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE SH. RAJIV K UMAR, MOHALI FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 16.12.2010 OF THE LD. CIT(A)-1, LUD HIANA. 2. SINCE THE ISSUES INVOLVED ARE COMMON IN THESE AP PEALS WHICH WERE HEARD TOGETHER SO THESE ARE BEING DISPOS ED OFF BY THIS CONSOLIDATED ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE AND BREVITY. 3. FIRST WE WILL DEAL WITH THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESS EE SH. RAJIV KUMAR IN ITA NO. 41/CHD./2011 FOR THE ASSESSM ENT YEAR 2007-08. FOLLOWING GROUNDS HAVE BEEN RAISED IN THIS APPEAL: 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE WORTHY CIT(A) IN APPEAL NO. 41-IT/CIT(A)-I/LDH/09-10 DATED 16.12.2010 HAS ERRED IN PASSING THAT ORDER IN CONTRAVENTION OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 250(6) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 2. THAT ON THE FACTS, LEGAL POSITION AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE WORTHY CIT(A) VIDE PARA 4.2 OF HIS ORDER, WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING ACTION OF LD. AO, WHEREIN HE MADE ADDITION OF RS. 4,01,288/- PAID BY THE ASSESSEE AS INTEREST TO ICICI BANK EVEN WHEN THE SAID LOAN HAS BEEN UTILIZED IN BUSINESS OF THE APPELLANT AND THE APPELLANT HAD SUFFICIENT INTEREST FREE FUNDS TO ITA NOS. 1327, 1422 & 1427/CHD./2010 ITA NO. 41 & CO. 13/CHD./2011 RAJIV KUMAR, SOHAN LAL, KARAN EMPIRE 3 SOURCE THE INTEREST FREE ADVANCES FOR NON BUSINESS PURPOSES ALSO. 3. THAT ON THE FACTS, LEGAL POSITION AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE WORTHY CIT (A) VIDE PARA 9 OF HIS ORDER, WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMIN G ACTION OF LD. AO, WHEREIN HE MADE ADDITION OF RS.28,00,000/- BY RELYING ON A DUMB DOCUMENT, TOTALLY DENIED BY THE APPELLANT, WRONGLY DECIPHERED BY THE LD. AO, WITHOUT FINDING OR POINTING TO ANY CORROBORATIVE EVIDENCE. 4. THAT THE LD. AO HAS ERRED IN FRAMING ASSESSMENT U/S 153A R.W.S. 143(3) OF THE ACT BY ISSUING NOTICE U/S 153A OF THE ACT EVEN WHEN THE SEARCH YEAR CANNOT BE ASSESSED U/S 153A OF THE ACT AND HENCE THE WHOLE PROCEEDINGS ARE VOID AB INITIO. 5. THAT THE LD. AO HAS ERRED IN FRAMING PRESENT ASSESSMENT BEYOND HIS POWERS, TIME PERIOD AND JURISDICTION AND UNDER RELEVANT PROVISIONS OF LAW AND HENCE THE ASSESSMENT ITSELF IS VOID AND ILLEGAL . 6. THAT THE LD. AO WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CHARGING INTEREST UNDER 234A/234B/234C OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 AND THE APPELLANT DISPUTES THE MANNER OF COMPUTATION OF THE SAME. 7. THAT DIE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE FOR ANY ADDITION , DELETION OR AMENDMENT IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ON OR BEFORE THE DISPOSAL OF THE SAME. 4. AT THE FIRST INSTANCE, THE LD. LD. COUNSEL FOR T HE ASSESSEE ARGUED GROUND NO. 4 VIDE WHICH THE GRIEVAN CE OF THE ASSESSEE RELATES TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE AO IN FRAMING THE ASSESSMENT U/S 153A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT). 5. THE FACTS RELATED TO THIS ISSUE IN BRIEF ARE THA T A SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERATION U/S 132(1) OF THE ACT WAS CON DUCTED AT THE RESIDENCE OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE INVESTIGATION WING, ITA NOS. 1327, 1422 & 1427/CHD./2010 ITA NO. 41 & CO. 13/CHD./2011 RAJIV KUMAR, SOHAN LAL, KARAN EMPIRE 4 CHANDIGARH ON 10.08.2006 AND THE ASSESSEE WAS COVER ED U/S 132 OF THE ACT DURING THIS SEARCH AND SEIZURE ACTIO N. THE AO ISSUED THE NOTICE U/S 153A OF THE ACT. IN RESPONSE, THE ASSESSEE FILED THE RETURN OF INCOME ON 31.10.2007 D ECLARING AN INCOME OF RS.19,11,020/-. THE AO FRAMED THE ASSE SSMENT U/S 153A R.W.S. 143(3) OF THE ACT AT AN INCOME OF RS.92,90,400/-. 6. BEING AGGRIEVED THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER TO THE LD. CIT(A) AND CHALLENGED THE VALIDITY OF THE ASSES SMENT FRAMED BY THE AO U/S 153A R.W.S. 143(3) OF THE ACT AND SUBMITTED THAT A SEARCH ACTION WAS CARRIED OUT AT T HE PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE ON 10.08.2006 AND THE ASSE SSMENT YEAR OF THE SEARCH BECOME ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN SECTION 153A(1)(A)/(B) OF THE ACT PROVIDES THAT ASSESSMENT U/S 153A OF THE ACT CAN BE INITIATED FOR 6 YEARS PRECEDING T HE YEAR OF SEARCH. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSMENT FRAMED BY THE AO U/S 153A OF THE ACT FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION WA S AGAINST THE PROVISION OF THE ACT. 7. THE LD. CIT(A) AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE OBSERVED THAT THE AO NO DOUBT HAD MENTIONE D SECTION 153A OF THE ACT IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER BUT HE HAD ALSO MENTIONED SECTION 143(3) OF THE ACT. THEREFORE , EVEN IF THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE WAS TO BE ACCEPTED T HE ASSESSMENT COULD BE SAID TO HAVE BEEN MADE U/S 143( 3) OF THE ACT. ACCORDINGLY, HE DID NOT FIND MERIT IN THE SUBM ISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE. ITA NOS. 1327, 1422 & 1427/CHD./2010 ITA NO. 41 & CO. 13/CHD./2011 RAJIV KUMAR, SOHAN LAL, KARAN EMPIRE 5 8. NOW THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL. THE LD. LD. COUNS EL FOR THE ASSESSEE REITERATED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT AS PER THE PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN SECTION 153A OF THE ACT, TH E ASSESSMENT CAN BE FRAMED UNDER THE PROVISION OF THE SAID SECTION FOR THE 6 ASSESSMENT YEARS PRECEDING TO THE SEARCH AND AS THE SEARCH TOOK PLACE IN THE PREVIOUS YEAR R ELEVANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. THEREFORE, FOR THIS YEAR, THE ASSESSMENT COULD HAVE BEEN FRAMED EITHER U/S 143(3) OR SECTION 144 OF THE ACT AS THE CASE MAY BE , BUT NOT U/S 153A OF THE ACT. THE RELIANCE WAS PLACED ON THE FOLLOWING CASE LAWS: UPENDRA KUMAR SHARMA VS DCIT, CIRCLE-9(1), NEW DELHI IN ITA NOS. 3137 TO 3143/DEL/2009 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2000-01, 2002-03, 2003-04, 2005-06 & 2006-07, ORDER DATED 12.04.2010\ CIT VS HAZARI LAL (2009) 17 DTR 265 (P&H) 9. IN HIS RIVAL SUBMISSIONS THE LD. DR STRONGLY SUP PORTED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND FURTHER SUB MITTED THAT THE SEARCH TOOK PLACE IN THIS CASE ON 10.08.2006, T HEREFORE, THE ASSESSMENT UP TO THE SAID DATE COULD HAVE BEEN FRAMED U/S 153A OF THE ACT. HE ALSO SUBMITTED THAT THE AO HAD MENTIONED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER THAT THE ASSESSME NT WAS FRAMED U/S 153A/143(3) OF THE ACT, THEREFORE, IT CO ULD HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED THAT THE ASSESSMENT FRAMED BY THE A O FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION I.E. ASSESS MENT YEAR 2007-08 WAS U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT. 10. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES AND CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE O N THE RECORD. IN THE PRESENT CASE, IT IS NOT IN DISPUTE T HAT THE SEARCH ITA NOS. 1327, 1422 & 1427/CHD./2010 ITA NO. 41 & CO. 13/CHD./2011 RAJIV KUMAR, SOHAN LAL, KARAN EMPIRE 6 TOOK PLACE AT THE PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE ON 10.08 .2006 AND THEREAFTER THE AO ISSUED NOTICE U/S 153A OF THE ACT TO FILE THE RETURN OF INCOME. IN RESPONSE TO THE SAID NOTIC E U/S 153A OF THE ACT, THE ASSESSEE FILED THE RETURN OF INCOME ON 31.10.2007. THEREAFTER, THE AO FRAMED THE ASSESSMEN T U/S 153A R.W.S. 143(3) OF THE ACT VIDE ORDER DATED 21.0 8.2009. WE, THEREFORE, DO NOT SEE MERIT IN THIS OBSERVATION OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND CONTENTION OF THE LD. CIT DR THAT THE AS SESSMENT FRAMED BY THE AO FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION C OULD HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED TO BE FRAMED U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT, FOR THE SIMPLE REASON THAT THE AO HIMSELF MENTIONED IN THE FACE OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER THAT THE ASSESSMENT WAS FRA MED U/S 153A R.W.S. 143(3) OF THE ACT. MOREOVER, HE ISSUED THE NOTICE U/S 153A OF THE ACT REQUIRING THE ASSESSEE T O FILE THE RETURN. NOW QUESTION ARISES AS TO WHETHER THE ASSES SMENT FRAMED BY THE AO U/S 153A OF THE ACT FOR THE ASSESS MENT YEAR RELEVANT TO THE PREVIOUS YEAR CONTAINING THE S EARCH PERIOD WAS VALID OR NOT. IN THIS REGARD, IT IS RELE VANT TO DISCUSS THE PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN SECTION 153A OF THE ACT, WHICH READ AS UNDER: 153A (1) NOTWITHSTANDING ANYTHING CONTAINED IN SECTION 139, SECTION 147, SECTION 148, SECTION 149, SECTION 151 AND SECTION 153, IN THE CASE OF A PERSON WHERE A SEARCH IS INITIATED UNDER SECTION 132 OR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT, OTHER DOCUMENTS OR ANY ASSETS ARE REQUISITIONED UNDER SECTION 132A AFTER THE 31ST DAY OF MAY, 2003, THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL (A) ISSUE NOTICE TO SUCH PERSON REQUIRING HIM TO FURNISH WITHIN SUCH PERIOD, AS MAY BE SPECIFIED IN THE NOTICE, THE RETURN OF INCOME IN RESPECT OF EACH ASSESSMENT YEAR FALLING WITHIN SIX ITA NOS. 1327, 1422 & 1427/CHD./2010 ITA NO. 41 & CO. 13/CHD./2011 RAJIV KUMAR, SOHAN LAL, KARAN EMPIRE 7 ASSESSMENT YEARS REFERRED TO IN CLAUSE (B), IN THE PRESCRIBED FORM AND VERIFIED IN THE PRESCRIBED MANNER AND SETTING FORTH SUCH OTHER PARTICULARS AS MAY BE PRESCRIBED AND THE PROVISIONS OF THIS ACT SHALL, SO FAR AS MAY BE, APPLY ACCORDINGLY AS IF SUCH RETURN WERE A RETURN REQUIRED TO BE FURNISHED UNDER SECTION 139; (B) ASSESS OR REASSESS THE TOTAL INCOME OF SIX ASSESSMENT YEARS IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING THE ASSESSMENT YEAR RELEVANT TO THE PREVIOUS YEAR IN WHICH SUCH SEARCH IS CONDUCTED OR REQUISITION IS MADE: PROVIDED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL ASSESS OR REASSESS THE TOTAL INCOME IN RESPECT OF EACH ASSESSMENT YEAR FALLING WITHIN SUCH SIX ASSESSMENT YEARS: PROVIDED FURTHER THAT ASSESSMENT OR REASSESSMENT, IF ANY, RELATING TO ANY ASSESSMENT YEAR FALLING WITHIN THE PERIOD OF SIX ASSESSMENT YEARS REFERRED TO IN THIS SUB-SECTION PENDING ON THE DATE OF INITIATION OF THE SEARCH UNDER SECTION 132 OR MAKING OF REQUISITION UNDER SECTION 132A, AS THE CASE MAY BE, SHALL ABATE. PROVIDED ALSO THAT THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT MAY BY RULES MADE BY IT AND PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL GAZETTE (EXCEPT IN CASES WHERE ANY ASSESSMENT OR REASSESSMENT HAS ABATED UNDER THE SECOND PROVISO), SPECIFY THE CLASS OR CLASSES OF CASES IN WHICH THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL NOT BE REQUIRED TO ISSUE NOTICE FOR ASSESSING OR REASSESSING THE TOTAL INCOME FOR SIX ASSESSMENT YEARS IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING THE ASSESSMENT YEAR RELEVANT TO THE PREVIOUS YEAR IN WHICH SEARCH IS CONDUCTED OR REQUISITION IS MADE. (2) IF ANY PROCEEDING INITIATED OR ANY ORDER OF ASSESSMENT OR REASSESSMENT MADE UNDER SUB- SECTION (1) HAS BEEN ANNULLED IN APPEAL OR ANY OTHER LEGAL PROCEEDING, THEN, NOTWITHSTANDING ITA NOS. 1327, 1422 & 1427/CHD./2010 ITA NO. 41 & CO. 13/CHD./2011 RAJIV KUMAR, SOHAN LAL, KARAN EMPIRE 8 ANYTHING CONTAINED IN SUB-SECTION (1) OR SECTION 153, THE ASSESSMENT OR REASSESSMENT RELATING TO ANY ASSESSMENT YEAR WHICH HAS ABATED UNDER THE SECOND PROVISO TO SUB-SECTION (1), SHALL STAND REVIVED WITH EFFECT FROM THE DATE OF RECEIPT OF THE ORDER OF SUCH ANNULMENT BY THE COMMISSIONER: PROVIDED THAT SUCH REVIVAL SHALL CEASE TO HAVE EFFECT, IF SUCH ORDER OF ANNULMENT IS SET ASIDE. EXPLANATION.FOR THE REMOVAL OF DOUBTS, IT IS HEREBY DECLARED THAT, (I) SAVE AS OTHERWISE PROVIDED IN THIS SECTION, SECTION 153B AND SECTION 153C, ALL OTHER PROVISIONS OF THIS ACT SHALL APPLY TO THE ASSESSMEN T MADE UNDER THIS SECTION; (II) IN AN ASSESSMENT OR REASSESSMENT MADE IN RESPECT OF AN ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER THIS SECTION, THE TAX SHALL BE CHARGEABLE AT THE RATE OR RATES AS APPLICABLE TO SUCH ASSESSMENT YEAR. 11. THE AFORESAID PROVISIONS STARTS WITH A NON OBST ANTE CLAUSE, THEREFORE, THESE PROVISIONS OVERRIDES THE O THER PROVISIONS CONTAINED UNDER SECTIONS 139, 147, 148, 149, 151 AND 153 OF THE ACT, ACCORDING TO THE PROVISIONS CON TAINED IN CLAUSE (B) OF SUB-SECTION (1) OF SECTION 153A OF TH E ACT, THE ASSESSMENT U/S 153A CAN BE FRAMED FOR 6 ASSESSM ENT YEARS IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING THE ASSESSMENT YEAR REL EVANT TO THE PREVIOUS YEAR IN WHICH SEARCH WAS CONDUCTED OR REQUISITION WAS MADE. IN THE INSTANT CASE, THE SEAR CH TOOK PLACE ON 10.08.2006, THE RELEVANT PREVIOUS YEAR IS 2006-07 WHICH ENDS ON 31.03.2007. IT IS WELL SETTLED THAT A N ASSESSMENT IS TO BE FRAMED FOR THE PREVIOUS YEAR WH ICH PRECEDES THE ASSESSMENT YEAR. THEREFORE, FOR THE PR EVIOUS YEAR 2006-07, THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08, THIS ASS ESSMENT YEAR SUCCEEDS THE PERIOD OF SEARCH AND NOT PRECEDS. FROM THE ITA NOS. 1327, 1422 & 1427/CHD./2010 ITA NO. 41 & CO. 13/CHD./2011 RAJIV KUMAR, SOHAN LAL, KARAN EMPIRE 9 PLAIN LANGUAGE OF THE PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN CLAUS E (B) OF SUB-SECTION (1) OF SECTION 153A OF THE ACT, IT IS C LEAR THAT THE ASSESSMENT U/S 153A OF THE ACT COULD HAVE BEEN FRAMED FOR THE 6 ASSESSMENT YEARS WHICH PRECEDES THE ASSES SMENT YEAR 2007-08. THEREFORE, WE ARE OF THE CONFIRMED VI EW THAT THE ASSESSMENT U/S 153A OF THE ACT COULD HAVE BEEN FRAMED FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2001-02 TO 2006-07 ONLY AN D NOT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. AS THE ASSESSMENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION WAS FRAMED BY T HE AO U/S 153A OF THE ACT, THEREFORE, THIS ASSESSMENT WAS NOT VALID IN THE EYES OF LAW AND VOID AB INITIO. THUS, THE SAME IS QUASHED. SINCE, WE HAVE QUASHED THE ASSESSMENT ORDE R UNDER CONSIDERATION, CONSIDERING THE SAME AS INVALID, THE REFORE, NO FINDINGS ARE GIVEN ON THE OTHER GROUNDS RAISED BY T HE ASSESSEE. 12. IN CROSS OBJECTION NO. 13/CHD./2011 PERTAINING TO M/S KARAN EMPIRE PVT. LTD. AND IN ITA NO. 1327/CHD./201 0 FILED BY THE ASSESSEE SH. S. L. ARORA FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007- 08, AN IDENTICAL ISSUE AS WAS INVOLVED IN THE CASE OF SH. RAJIV KUMAR, MOHALI (SUPRA) HAS BEEN RAISED. THEREF ORE, OUR FINDINGS GIVEN IN THE FORMER PART OF THIS ORDER IN ITA NO. 41/CHD./2011 IN THE CASE OF RAJIV KUMAR, MOHALI VS ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH SHALL APPLY MUTATIS MUTANDIS. ACCORDINGLY, THE CROSS OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE M/ S KARAN EMPIRE PVT. LTD., MOHALI, IN CO NO. 13/CHD./2011 AN D THE APPEAL APPEAL IN ITA NO. 1327/CHD./2010 FOR THE ASS ESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 IN RESPECT OF SH. SOHAN LAL ARORA, MOH ALI VS ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH ARE ALLOWED, THE REFORE, THE RESPECTIVE ASSESSMENT FRAMED U/S 153A OF THE AC T IN ITA NOS. 1327, 1422 & 1427/CHD./2010 ITA NO. 41 & CO. 13/CHD./2011 RAJIV KUMAR, SOHAN LAL, KARAN EMPIRE 10 THESE CASES ARE HELD TO BE INVALID. SINCE, THE LEGA L ISSUE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED, THEREFORE, NO FI NDINGS ARE GIVEN IN RESPECT OF THE OTHER ISSUES RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE AND WE DO NOT SEE ANY MERIT IN THE APPEALS OF THE DEPAR TMENT. 13. IN THE RESULT, THE CROSS OBJECTION IN THE CASE OF M/S KAR AN EMPIRE PVT. LTD., MOHALI AND THE APPEALS IN THE CASE OF SH. RA JIV KUMAR AND SH. SOHAN LAL ARORA, MOHALI ARE ALLOWED WHILE THE APPEALS OF THE DEPARTMENT ARE DISMISSED. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 22/12/2016) SD/- SD/- (RAVISH SOOD) (N. K. SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT M EMBER DATED: 22/12/2016 *SUBODH* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR