M/s. Brightways Housing & Land Dev. Ltd., New Delhi V. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 5118/DEL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 90876 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-04-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 31-03-2015
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 06-09-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A MISRA
• Keywords: Search and seizure; Document seized; Opportunity of being heard; Documents seized
• Section: 153A; 132

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH G NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL : VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI H.S. SIDHU: JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NOS. 5117 & 5118/DEL/2013 ASSTT. YRS: 2005-06 & 2006-07 M/S BRIGHTWAYS HOUSING & LAND VS. DCIT, CENTRAL CIR CLE-18, DEV. LTD., 9, KASTURBA GANDHI MARG, NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI-110001. PAN: AABCB 9862 D ( APPELLANT ) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI SALIL AGARWAL ADV. & SHAILESH GUPTA CA RESPONDENT BY : SMT. A. MISRA CIT (DR) DATE OF HEARING: 31/03/2015. DATE OF ORDER : 01/04/2015. O R D E R PER G.D. AGRAWAL, V.P. : THESE APPEAL, BY THE ASSESSEE, ARE DIRECTED AGAINST SEPARATE ORDERS OF LD. CIT(A), RELATING TO A.Y. 2005-06 & 2006-07. SIN CE IDENTICAL ISSUES ARE INVOLVED FOR ADJUDICATION, BOTH THESE APPEALS WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY A COMMON ORDER FOR THE SAKE CO NVENIENCE. 2. GROUND NO. 2 OF THE ASSESSEES APPEALS, WHICH IS COMMON IN BOTH THE APPEALS, READS AS UNDER: 2 ITA 5117 & 5118/DEL/2013 M/S BRIGHTWAYS HOUSING & LAND DEV.. LTD. VS. DCIT 2. THAT LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEAL S) HAS GROSSLY ERRED BOTH IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN SUSTAININ G THE INITIATION OF PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 153C OF THE ACT WHICH WAS WITHOUT JURISDICTION AS NO DOCUMENT BELONGING T O THE ASSESSEE COMPANY WAS FOUND FROM THE PREMISES OF THE SEARCHED PERSON AND THUS, THE PROCEEDINGS INITIATED UNDER SE CTION 153C OF THE ACT SHOULD HAVE BEEN QUASHED AS SUCH. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, BEFORE US, IT WAS SUBMIT TED BY THE LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE THAT SEARCH & SEIZURE OPERATION U/S 132 OF THE I.T. ACT WAS CARRIED OUT ON 5-1-2009 IN TANEJA-PURI GROUP OF CASES. DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH, CERTAIN DOCUMENTS BELONGING TO THE ASSESSEE WERE FOUND AND SEIZED. ON THE BASIS OF THOSE DOCUMENTS, THE AO INITIATED PROCEEDINGS U/S 153C IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE. HE STATED THAT THE DOCUMENTS SEIZED FROM THE PREMISES OF TANEJA-PURI GROUP OF CASES WERE RELEVANT TO ASSTT. YEAR 2009-10 AND IN THAT YE AR THE AO HAD ALREADY MADE THE ADDITION ON THE BASIS OF SUCH DOCUMENTS. IN SUPPOR T OF THIS CONTENTION HE REFERRED TO SATISFACTION NOTE RECORDED BY THE AO FOR INITIAT ING PROCEEDINGS U/S 153C AND POINTED OUT THAT PAGE NOS. 19 TO 23 OF ANNEXURE A-7 BELONGED TO THE ASSESSEE. HE ALSO REFERRED TO ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR AY 2009-10 AN D POINTED OUT THAT ALL THESE DOCUMENTS PERTAINED TO AY 2009-10 AND THE ADDITION ON THE BASIS OF THESE DOCUMENTS WAS ALREADY MADE IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009- 10. HE, THEREFORE, SUBMITTED THAT THE INITIATION OF PROCEEDINGS U/S 153C FOR THE YEARS UNDER CONSIDERATION IS NOT VALID. IN SUPPORT OF THIS CONTENTION HE RELIED UPO N THE DECISION OF THE ITAT DELHI B BENCH IN THE CASE OF DCIT VS. DEVI DAYAL PETRO CHEMICAL PVT. LTD. VIDE ITA NO. 5430 & 5436/DEL/2013. HE ALSO RELIED UPON THE D ECISION OF HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF SSP AVIA TION LTD. VS. DCIT 346 ITR 177. 3 ITA 5117 & 5118/DEL/2013 M/S BRIGHTWAYS HOUSING & LAND DEV.. LTD. VS. DCIT 4. THE LD. CIT(DR), ON THE OTHER HAND, RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW.IN ALTERNATE SHE SUBMITTED THAT IN THE CASE O F DEVI DAYAL PETRO CHEMICAL PVT. LTD. (SUPRA), THE ITAT SET ASIDE THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF AO. THEREFORE, AT THE MOST THE MATTER CAN BE SENT BACK TO THE FILE OF AO FOR VERIFICATION AS PER THE FINDING OF THE ITAT IN THE CASE OF DEVI DAYAL PETRO CHEMICA L PVT. LTD. (SUPRA) IN PARA 9.2 OF THEIR ORDER. 5. IN REJOINDER, IT IS SUBMITTED BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE THAT IN THE CASE OF DEVI DAYAL PETRO CHEMICAL PVT. LTD. (SUPRA), THE ITAT DIRECTED THE AO TO VERIFY THE YEAR TO WHICH THE DOCUMENTS BELONGED. HO WEVER, IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE THIS WORK HAS ALREADY BEEN DONE BY THE AO AND THE ADDITION HAS BEEN MADE IN AY 2009-10. HE WAS FAIR ENOUGH TO POINT OUT THAT THE ASSESSMENT FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 HAS BEEN QUASHED BY THE LD. CIT(A) BECAUSE THE NOTICE U/S 143(2) WAS ISSUED AFTER MORE THAN 12 MONTHS FRO M THE END OF THE MONTH IN WHICH RETURN WAS FILED. 6. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE ARGUMENTS OF BO TH THE SIDES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL PLACED BEFORE US. THE CIT(A) IN PARA 1 2 OF HIS ORDER HAS REPRODUCED THE SATISFACTION NOTE RECORDED BY THE REVENUE FOR I NITIATING PROCEEDINGS U/S 153C. IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO REPRODUCE THE SAME HERE-IN- BELOW: A SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERATION UNDER SECTION 132(1 ) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT WAS CARRIED ON 05.01.2009 AT VARIOUS BUSINESS AND RESIDENTIAL PREMISES OF TANEJA -PURI GROUP OF C ASES. DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH AT 9, K.G MARG, NEW DELHI THE RESIDENCE OF SH. RAVINDER KUMAR TANEJA AND OFFICE PREMISE OF VARIOUS 4 ITA 5117 & 5118/DEL/2013 M/S BRIGHTWAYS HOUSING & LAND DEV.. LTD. VS. DCIT TDI GROUP OF COMPANIES, VARIOUS INCRIMINATING DOCUM ENTS WERE FOUND AND SEIZED. PAGE 19 TO 23 OF THE ANNEXURE A-7 OF PARTY A-2 CONT AINS INFORMATION RELATING TO TDI, CENTRE, JASOLA MENTION ING SHOP NUMBER, CUSTOMER AREA (SQ. FT.) TOTAL DEAL. MISC, R ECEIVED, CHEQUE RECEIVED, TOTAL DUE AND THE VALUE AT WHICH A GREEMENT IS TO BE MADE. UNDER THE COLUMN OF TOTAL DEAL RATE OF THE SHOP IS MENTIONED. OUT OF THE TOTAL CONSIDERATION PART IS R ECEIVED AS CHEQUE AND CORRESPONDING RATE RECEIVED THROUGH CHEQ UE IS MENTIONED UNDER IT AND ALSO THE AGREEMENT VALUE. IT IS SEEN THAT THE PROJECT TDI CENTRE JASOLA WAS U NDERTAKEN BY BRIGHTWAYS HOUSING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT LTD. IN VIE W OF THE ABOVE FACTS, I AM SATISFIED THAT THE BOOKS OF ACCOU NTS AND DOCUMENTS BELONGING TO THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAVE BE EN FOUND AND SEIZED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH UNDER SECTIO N 132(1) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 CARRIED OUT AT 9, KG MARG, NEW DELHI THE RESIDENCE OF SH. RAVINDER KUMAR TANEJA AN D OFFICE PREMISES OF VARIOUS TDI GROUP OF COMPANIES. IN THE LIGHT OF THE ABOVE, I AM SATISFIED THAT THE ABOVE CASE IS A FIT CASE FOR ISSUING NOTICE UNDER SECTION 153C OF T HE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 AS THE SEIZED DOCUMENTS MENTIONED ABOVE B ELONG TO BRIGHTWAYS HOUSING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT LTD. BEING A PERSON OTHER THAN A PERSON IN WHOSE CASE THE SEARCH HAS BEEN INITIATED. (GAGAN SOOD) DCIT,CC-18, NEW DELHI' 6.1. FROM THE ABOVE IT IS EVIDENT THAT PAGES 19 TO 23 OF ANNEXURE A7 WAS THE DOCUMENT WHICH WAS FOUND AT THE TIME OF SEARCH OF TANEJA-PURI GROUP AND WHICH WAS CONSIDERED AS BELONGING TO THE ASSESS EE. WE FIND THAT IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR AY 2009-10, THE AO HAS DISCUSS ED THESE FACTS IN PARA 5 OF HIS ORDER WHICH READ AS UNDER: 5 ITA 5117 & 5118/DEL/2013 M/S BRIGHTWAYS HOUSING & LAND DEV.. LTD. VS. DCIT 5. DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH AT 9, KG, MARG, NEW DELHI CERTAIN INCRIMINATING DOCUMENT VIDE ANN. A-7 PAGE N OS. 19 TO 24 HAVE BEEN FOUND AND SEIZED. THE DOCUMENTS GIVE C OMPLETE DETAILS IN RESPECT OF ACTUAL SALE CONSIDERATION IN RESPECT OF VARIOUS SHOPS IN TDS CENTRE. THESE PAGES ARE ANNEXE D TO THIS ORDER AND ARE A PART OF IT. 6.2. THEN IN PARA 6 HE GAVE A SCANNED COPY OF THE D OCUMENT. IN PARA 7 TO 10 HE MENTIONED AS UNDER: 7. THE DOCUMENTS SHOW FOLLOWING DETAILS: 1. SHOP NUMBER 2. NAME OF CUSTOMER 3. AREA 4. TOTAL DEAL AND RATE 5. MISCELLANEOUS RECEIVED 6. CHEQUE RECEIVED 7. TOTAL DUE 8. AGREEMENT VALUE ( AND RATE) 8. A SIMPLE PERUSAL OF THE ABOVE DOCUMENTS SHOWS T HAT THE ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED ACTUAL CONSIDERATION WHICH IS MENTIONED UNDER THE HEAD TOTAL DEAL BUT HAS SHOWN ONLY A PA RT OF IT IN THE OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS I.E. 'AGREEMENT VALUE' IN' R ESPECT OF THE CONSIDERATION RECEIVED THROUGH CHEQUE. THE BALANCE AMOUNT HAS BEEN RECEIVED IN CASH AND IS MENTIONED UNDER T HE HEAD 'MISC. RECEIVED'. THE AMOUNT UNDER THIS HEAD AND 'T OTAL DEAL' HEAD IS WRITTEN IN CODE AFTER OMITTING TWO ZEROS. T HIS IS VERY CLEAR AND OBVIOUS BY LOOKING AT THE RATES AND AGREE MENT VALUE. ON MULTIPLYING THE RATE WITH AREA, THE FIGURE OF TO TAL DEAL IS CALCULATED ON THE BASIS OF WHICH IT BECOMES CRYSTA L CLEAR THAT 6 ITA 5117 & 5118/DEL/2013 M/S BRIGHTWAYS HOUSING & LAND DEV.. LTD. VS. DCIT THE ASSESSEE HAS IGNORED TWO ZEROES' OUT OF THE TOT AL CONSIDERATION PAID IN CASH AND RECORDED AS MISCELLA NEOUS. 9. THE' DETAILS OF TOTAL DEAL VALUE AND AMOUNT RECE IVED AS 'MISC IN CASH AS CONTAINED IN PAGES 19 TO 23 IS CALCULAT ED BELOW:- TOTAL DEAL MISE RECEIVED ' SHOP NO. FF - 06 6916500 3816500 FF - 20 993000 475000 FF31 4867900 2434900 . FF - 30 4867900 2434900 GF - 05 9859500 5959500 : ' GF - 04 11268000 6768000 GF - 01 14009000' 12009000 ' GF - 27 6827100 3427100 : GF26 7041600 NIL GF - 35 6400000 ' 3200000 ' GF - 27 6827100 3427100 GF. . Q3 13900000 6950000' GF - 19 11312100 5712100 FF17 , 5142000 . 2942000 FF - 10 5580800 2536742 FF - 9 7562400 3437442 GF - 46A 4100000 1640000 GF - 18 8375000 5025000 TOTAL 72195284 10. SEIZED PAGE 24 FURTHER SHOWS CASH PAYMENT OF RS . 74,75,500/- IN RESPECT OF UNITS G-10, G-10, G-25 AN D G-38-39. THESE AMOUNTS ARE NOT INCLUDED IN PAGE NO. 19 TO 23 AND THEREFORE ARE IN ADDITION TO THE TABULATED MISC. AMOUNT OF RS. 7,21,95,284. 6.3. THEREAFTER HE DISCUSSED THE ASSESSEES CONTENT ION RELATING TO THOSE DOCUMENTS AND DISAGREEING WITH THE ASSESSEES OBJEC TION MADE THE ADDITION OF RS. 7,96,70,780/- IN AY 2009-10. THUS, AS PER RE VENUE, THE INCRIMINATING DOCUMENT I.E. SEIZED PAPER NOS. 19 TO 23 BELONGED T O THE ASSESSEE, RELEVANT 7 ITA 5117 & 5118/DEL/2013 M/S BRIGHTWAYS HOUSING & LAND DEV.. LTD. VS. DCIT TO AY 2009-10 AND NOT RELATING TO AY 2005-06 OR AY 2006-07, WHICH ARE THE YEARS UNDER APPEAL BEFORE US. 6.4. IN THE CASE OF DEVI DAYAL PETRO CHEMICAL PVT. LTD. (SUPRA), THE TRIBUNAL HELD AS UNDER: 9.1. IT WAS CONTENDED BY THE LEARNED COUNSEL THAT THE DOCUMENTS MENTIONED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE SATISFACTION NOTE I.E. DOCUMENTS AT PAGES 1 TO 25 O F ANNEXURE A- 5 ARE ONLY THE COUNTERFOIL OF THE CHEQUE BOOK WHICH IS DULY ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. HE HAD ALSO CONTENDED THAT THE COUNTERFOIL BELONGED TO THE YEAR 2008-09 A ND, THEREFORE, THE PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 153C COULD NOT HAVE BEEN INITIATED FOR THE YEARS TO WHICH THE DOCUMENTS DO NOT BELONG AND EVEN AFTER INITIATING PROCEEDINGS TO THE YEAR TO WHICH THE DOCUMENTS BELONGED, THE ASSESSING OFFICER OUGHT TO HAVE DROPPED THE PROCEEDINGS BECAUSE ALL TRANSACTIO NS REFLECTED BY THE COUNTERFOILS BY THE CHEQUES IS DUL Y ACCOUNTED FOR. IN SUPPORT OF THIS CONTENTION, HE HAD RELIED U PON THE DECISION OF HON'BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN T HE CASE OF SSP AVIATION LTD. - 346 ITR 177. AT PAGE 189 OF THE REPORT IN PARAGRAPH 17, THEIR LORDSHIPS HELD AS UNDER:- 'THE SECTION MERELY ENABLES THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES TO INVESTIGATE INTO THE CONTENTS OF THE DOCUMENT SEIZED, 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 APPROPRIATE PERSON. IT IS AIMED AT ENSURING THAT INCOME DOES NOT ESCAPE ASSESSMENT IN THE HANDS OF ANY OTHER PERSON MERELY BECAUSE HE HAS NOT BEEN SEARCHED UNDER SECTION 132 OF THE ACT. IT IS ONLY A FIRST STEP TO THE ENQUIRY, WHICH IS TO FOLLOW. THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHO HAS SEARCHED 8 ITA 5117 & 5118/DEL/2013 M/S BRIGHTWAYS HOUSING & LAND DEV.. LTD. VS. DCIT 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 HAVING JURISDICTION OVER THE OTHER PERSON AND THEREAFTER IT IS FOR THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAVING JURISDICTION OVER THE OTHER PERSON T O FOLLOW THE PROCEDURE PRESCRIBED BY SECTION 153A IN AN ATTEMPT TO ENSURE THAT THE INCOME REFLECTED BY THE DOCUMENT HAS BEEN ACCOUNTED FOR BY SUCH OTHER 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 FO R THE PERIOD OF SIX YEARS DOES NOT SHOW THAT THE INCOME REFLECTED IN THE DOCUMENT HAS BEEN ACCOUNTED FOR, ADDITIONS WILL BE ACCORDINGLY MADE AFTER 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 POSITION.' 9.2. CONSIDERING THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND THE ARGU MENTS OF BOTH THE SIDES, WE SET ASIDE THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR RE-EXAMINATION OF THE ISSUE I N THE LIGHT OF THE ABOVE DECISION OF HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT I.E., THE ASSESSING OFFICER WILL FIRST VERIFY THE YEARS T O WHICH THE SEIZED DOCUMENTS BELONGED. THERE WOULD BE NO JUSTIF ICATION FOR CONTINUATION OF THE PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 153C TO WHICH THE SEIZED DOCUMENTS DO NOT BELONG. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER WILL DROP THE PROCEEDINGS INITIATED UNDER S ECTION 153 OF THE YEARS TO WHICH THE SEIZED DOCUMENTS DO NOT BELO NG. FOR THE YEAR TO WHICH THE SEIZED DOCUMENTS BELONGED, HE WIL L VERIFY WHETHER THE TRANSACTION REFLECTED BY THE SEIZED DOC UMENTS ARE DULY ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. IF THE TRANSACTIONS ARE DULY ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT, AS CONTENDED BY THE LEARNED COUNSEL, THE ASSESSING OFFICER WILL DRO P THE PROCEEDINGS INITIATED UNDER SECTION 153C. HOWEVER, 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 9 ITA 5117 & 5118/DEL/2013 M/S BRIGHTWAYS HOUSING & LAND DEV.. LTD. VS. DCIT OF ACCOUNT, THE PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 153C WILL CONTINUE AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER WILL MAKE THE ASSESSMENT AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. SINCE WE HAVE SET ASIDE ALL TH E YEARS UNDER APPEAL, THE REVENUE'S APPEALS ON MERITS DO NO T REQUIRE ANY ADJUDICATION AND THEY ARE ALSO DEEMED TO BE ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. THE ASSESSING OFFICER WILL PR OCEED TO MAKE THE ASSESSMENT AFRESH ONLY IN THE YEAR WHERE PROCEE DINGS UNDER SECTION 153C CAN VALIDLY CONTINUE IN THE LIGHT OF T HE ABOVE DECISION OF HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT. 6.5. THUS, IN THE ABOVE CASE, THE TRIBUNAL AFTER RE LYING UPON THE DECISION OF HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF SSP AVIATION LTD. (SUPRA),V ARRIVED AT THE CONCLUSION THAT THE PROCEE DINGS U/S 153C CAN BE INITIATED ONLY FOR THOSE YEARS TO WHICH THE SEIZED DOCUMENTS BELONGED AND NOT FOR ALL THE SIX YEARS. SINCE IN THAT CASE IT WA S NOT CLEAR TO WHICH YEAR THE DOCUMENTS BELONGED, THE ITAT DIRECTED THE AO TO VER IFY THE YEAR TO WHICH THE DOCUMENTS BELONGED AND FURTHER DIRECTED THE AO TO DROP THE PROCEEDINGS INITIATED U/S 153C FOR THE YEAR TO WHICH SEIZED DOC UMENTS DID NOT BELONG. 6.6. NOW IN THE CASE UNDER APPEAL BEFORE US, AFTER CONSIDERING THE SATISFACTION NOTE AND THE ASSESSMENT ORDER OF THE A O FOR AY 2009-10, IT IS EVIDENT THAT THE SEIZED DOCUMENT BELONGED TO AY 20 09-10 AND NOT TO AY 2005-06 & 2006-07. THEREFORE, IN OUR OPINION, THERE IS NO NECESSITY OF SENDING THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF AO FOR VERIF ICATION OF THE YEAR TO WHICH THE SEIZED DOCUMENT BELONGED. IN VIEW OF ABOV E, WE RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISIONS OF HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF SSP AVIATION LTD. (SUPRA); AND THE ITAT DELHI B B ENCH IN THE CASE OF DEVI DAYAL PETRO CHEMICAL PVT. LTD. (SUPRA), HOLD T HAT THE PROCEEDINGS U/S 153C WAS NOT VALIDLY INITIATED FOR AY 2005-06 AND 2 006-07 BECAUSE THE SEIZED DOCUMENT DID NOT BELONG TO THESE ASSESSMENT YEARS. WE, THEREFORE, 10 ITA 5117 & 5118/DEL/2013 M/S BRIGHTWAYS HOUSING & LAND DEV.. LTD. VS. DCIT QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS INITIATED U/S 153C AND CONSEQ UENTLY ASSESSMENT ORDERS PASSED IN PURSUANCE THEREOF. 6.7. SINCE WE HAVE ALREADY QUASHED THE ASSESSMENT O RDERS PASSED U/S 153C, THE OTHER GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE AGA INST THE ADDITIONS MADE IN THE ORDER U/S 153C DO NOT SURVIVE FOR ADJUDICATION. 7. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEALS ARE ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 01/04/2015. SD/- SD/- ( H.S. SIDHU ) ( G.D. AGRAWAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT DATED: 01/04/2015. *MP* COPY OF ORDER TO: 1. ASSESSEE 2. AO 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) DR, ITAT, NEW DELHI.