IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE SHRI G.C. GUPTA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOS.450, 451 & 452/AGRA/ 2012 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2003-04, 2004-05 & 2005-06 ASST./DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VS. M/S. RAMA SHANKAR AGARWAL&CO., CENTRAL CIRCLE, AGRA. 192, MOTIGANJ, AGRA. (PAN AABFR 2330 R). C.O. NOS.59, 60 & 61/AGRA/2012 (IN ITA NOS.450, 451 & 452/AGRA/ 2012) ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2003-04, 2004-05 & 2005-06 M/S. RAMA SHANKAR AGARWAL & CO., VS. ASST./DY. COMM ISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, 192, MOTIGANJ, AGRA. CENTRAL CIRCLE, AGRA. (PAN AABFR 2330 R). (APPELLANTS) (RESPONDENTS) REVENUE BY : SHRI ANIRUDH KUMAR, CIT (D.R.) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI ANURAG SINH A, ADVOCATES DATE OF HEARING : 22.07.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 24.07.2015 ORDER PER BENCH: THESE ARE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE AND CROSS OB JECTIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE THREE SEPARATE ORDERS OF THE L D. CIT(A)-I, AGRA, ALL DATED 26.03.2012, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2003-04, 2004- 05 & 2005-06. ITA NOS.450, 451 & 452/AGRA/2012 C.O. NOS.59, 60 & 61/AGRA/2012 A.YS. 2003-04, 04-05 & 05-06 2 2. SINCE THE CROSS OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE GO TO THE ROOT OF THE MATTER, WE SHALL NOW FIRST DEAL WITH THE SAME. 3. IN THE CROSS OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, T HE ASSESSEE HAD CHALLENGED THE VERY VALIDITY OF INITIATING PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTI ON 153C OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (THE ACT HEREINAFTER) IN THE ABSENCE OF RECO RDING NECESSARY SATISFACTION UNDER SECTION 153C OF THE ACT. 4. THE LD. C.I.T. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE FAIRL Y CONCEDED THAT NO SATISFACTION WAS RECORDED IN THIS CASE. HENCE WE PROCEED TO DEC IDE THE MATTER. IT IS NOW TRITE LAW THAT THE RECORDING OF SATISFACTION IS A SINE QUA NON FOR EXERCISING THE JURISDICTION UNDER SECTION 153C OF THE ACT. IN THE ABSENCE OF SUCH RE CORDING, THE ASSESSMENTS MADE ARE DECLARED AS INVALID. FOR THIS PROPOSITION, RELIANC E IS MADE ON THE FOLLOWING DECISIONS:- 1) CIT VS. GOPI APARTMENTS REPORTED IN (2014) 46 TA XMANN.COM 280 (ALL) 2) CIT VS. SHETTYS PHARMA & BIOLOGICALS LTD. REPORT ED IN (2015) 57 TAXMANN 282 (AP) 3) DSL PROPERTIES (P) LTD VS. DCIT REPORTED IN (201 3) 33 TAXMANN.COM 420 (DELHI) 4) MANISH MAHESWARI VS. ACIT REPORTED IN (2007) 289 ITR 341 (SC) 5) CIT VS. CALCUTTA KNITWEARS, 362 ITR 673 (SC) 6) CIT VS. M/S. MECHMEN (M.P. HIGH COURT) 7) SSP AVIATION LIMITED VS. DCIT, 369 ITR 596 (GUJ ARAT HIGH COURT) 8) CIT VS. CLASSIC ENTERPRISE, 358 ITR 465 (ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT) 9) PEPSI FOODS PVT. LTD. VS. ACIT, 90 CCH 0017 (DEL HI HIGH COURT) 10) PEPSICO INDIA HOLDINGS PVT. LTD VS. ACIT, 370 I TR 295 (DELHI HIGH COURT) 11) CIT VS. MADHI KESHWANI (ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT) I NCOME TAX APPEAL NO.108 OF 2014 JUDGEMENT DATED 11.03.2015. ITA NOS.450, 451 & 452/AGRA/2012 C.O. NOS.59, 60 & 61/AGRA/2012 A.YS. 2003-04, 04-05 & 05-06 3 5. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE RATIO LAID DOWN IN TH E ABOVE CASES, WE HOLD THAT THE ASSESSMENTS MADE IN THESE CASES ARE NULL AND VOID. HENCE, THE CROSS OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED. 6. AS FAR AS THE APPEALS FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT AR E CONCERNED, SINCE WE HAVE QUASHED THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS IN THE CROSS OBJ ECTIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE IN THESE APPEALS DO N OT SURVIVE. THEREFORE, THE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE ARE DISMISSED. 7. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE THREE CROSS OBJECTIONS FI LED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED AND ALL THE THREE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE ARE DISM ISSED (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 24.07. 2015) SD/- SD/- (G.C. GUPTA) (INTURI RAMA RAO) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUN TANT MEMBER DATE: 24 TH JULY, 2015 PBN/* COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT (APPEALS) CONCERNED 4. CIT CONCERNED 5. D.R., ITAT, AGRA BENCH, AGRA 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA