DCIT, Central Circle, Sambalpur V. M/s. Romass Vinimay Pvt. Ltd., Sundargarh

ITSSA 136/CTK/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5242 (ITAT-CUTTACK)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-02-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 23-10-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: S K TULSIYAN
• Keywords: Income from undisclosed sources; Search and seizure; Loose papers; Document seized; Question of law; Documents seized
• Section: 143(3); 153A; 201; 153; 119; 153C; 132

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI C.M. GARG, JM & SHRI L.P. SAHU, AM ( ) / IT(SS) A NO. 136 /CTK/201 8 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 11 - 201 2 ) DCIT, CEN TRAL CIRCLE, SAMBALPUR VS. M/S ROMASS VINIMAY PVT. LTD OF OM NIWAS, BARSUAN, SUNDERGARH, ODISHA - 770041 ./ PAN NO. : A A BCR 2597 K ( / APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) /REVENUE BY : SHRI S.M.KESHKAMAT, CIT - DR /ASSESSEE BY : SHRI S.K.TULSIYAN, ADVOCATE / DATE OF HEARING : 14 / 01 /20 20 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 20/02 /20 20 / O R D E R PER L.P.SAHU , A M : TH IS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENU E AGAI NST THE ORDER OF CIT( A ) - 2 , BHUBANESWAR , DATED 2 5 .06.2018 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011 - 2012 ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS : - (I ) ON THE POINT OF LAW INVOLVED IN THE CASE, THE LD. CIT (APPEALS) ERRED IN ANNULLING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED U/S. 153C R.W.S. 144 O F THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 WITHOUT APPLYING THE PROVISIONS OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961. (II) THE LD. CIT (APPEALS) ERRED IN NOT APPLYING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 153C OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961 PROPERLY SINCE THE SAID SECTION ONLY STIPULATES THAT THE SEIZ ED DOCUMENTS SHOULD BELONG TO OR PERTAIN TO ASSESSEE. WHEN THAT CONDITION IS SATISFIED, THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS WELL WITHIN HIS JURISDICTION TO INITIATE PROCEEDINGS UNDER THAT SECTION. IT NOWHERE STIPULATES THAT SUCH DOCUMENTS SHOULD BE INCRIMINATING IN N ATURE. (III) ON THE POINT OF LAW, THE LD. CIT (APPEALS) ERRED IN OBSERVING THAT PROVISIONS OF SECTION 153C CAN BE INITIATED ONLY IF THE SEIZED DOCUMENTS ARE INCRIMINATING IN NATURE WHEN THERE IS N SPECIFIC DEFINITION OF THE WORD 'INCRIMINATING' IN THE I NCOME TAX ACT, 1961. IT (SS) A NO S . 136/CTK/2018 2 (IV) THAT, THE APPELLANT CRAVES TO ADD, AMEND, MODIFY OR ALTER ANY GROUND OF APPEAL AT THE TIME OR BEFORE HEARING OF APPEAL. 2. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A NON - BANKING FINANCIAL COMPANY AND FILED ITS RETURN U/S .139 (1) OF THE ACT, 1961 ON 2 2 . 11 .201 1 , FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011 - 12, DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.46,450/ - . A SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERATION U/S. 132 OF I.T. ACT, 1961 WAS CONDUCTED AT THE RESIDENTIAL AND BUSINESS - CUM - OFFICE PREMISES OF SHRI BASUKINATH A GARWAL ON 25.02.2014 AT BARSUAN, DIST - SUNDARGARH. THE ASSESSEE BELONGS TO BASUKINATH ROADWAYS PVT LTD GROUP. DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH DISCLOSURE OF UNACCOUNTED INCOME AT RS.15 CRORES IN CASE OF BASUKINATH ROADWAYS PVT. LTD. AND RS.5 CRORES IN CASE OF BA JRANG KUMAR AGARWAL FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014 - 2015 WAS MADE U/S. 132(4) OF I.T. ACT, 1961. THEREAFTER THE AO ISSUED NOTICE U/S.L53C OF I.T. ACT, 1961. SUBSEQUENTLY THE AO COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT U/S. 1 53C R.W.S. 143(3) OF I.T. ACT, 1961. 3. AGGRIEVED F ROM THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, THE ASSESSEE FILED APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) AND THE CIT(A) AFTER DUE CONSIDERATION OF THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE AND FINDINGS OF THE AO, HAS ALLOWED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A), THE REVENUE IS I N APPEAL BEFORE THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL. IT (SS) A NO S . 136/CTK/2018 3 5. LD. DR BEFORE US RELIED ON THE ORDER OF ASSESSING OFFICER AND SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT(A) HAS PASSED THE ORDER WITHOUT APPLYING THE PROVISIONS OF INCOME TAX ACT. 6. ON TH E OTHER HAND, LD. AR SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND ALSO FILED WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS WHICH READ AS UNDER : - 1. NOW BASED ON THE ABOVE FACTS AND FROM THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL AS FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT, IT IS SEEN THAT THE CONTENTION OF THE DEPARTMENT IS THAT SECTION 153C OF THE A CT MERELY STIPULATES THAT THE SEIZED DOCUMENTS SHOULD BELONG TO OR PERTAIN TO ASSESSEE AND THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT OF THE SAME TO BE INCRIMINATING IN NATURE. 2. IN CONNECTION WITH THE SAID ABOVE CONTENTION OF THE DEPARTMENT, IT IS STATED THAT IT I S THE ABSOLUTE CLEAR AND EXPLICIT MANDATE OF LAW FULLY ENDORSED AND UPHELD BY JUDICIAL DECISIONS INCLUDING THAT OF THE HON'BLE APEX COURT THAT WHERE NO SPECIFIC INCRIMINATING MATERIAL OR DOCUMENT IS FOUND, ASSESSMENTS FOR SUCH ASSESSMENT YEARS CANNOT BE DI STURBED BY INVOKING THE PROVISIONS OF S. 153C OF THE ACT. 3. DEALING FIRSTLY WITH THE LAW, THE RELEVANT PORTION OF SECTION 153C OF THE ACT IS QUOTED AS UNDER: 153C. ASSESSMENT OF INCOME OF ANY OTHER PERSON. - (1) NOTWITHSTANDING ANYTHING CONTAINED IN SECTION 139, SECTION 147, SECTION 148, SECTION 149, SECTION 151 AND SECTION 153, WHERE THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS SATISFIED THAT ANY MONEY, BULLION, JEWELLERY OR OTHER VALUABLE ARTICLE OR THING OR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OR DOCUMENTS SEIZED OR REQUISITIONED BEL ONGS OR BELONG TO A PERSON OTHER THAN THE PERSON REFERRED TO IN SECTION 153 A, THEN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OR DOCUMENTS OR ASSETS SEIZED OR REQUISITIONED SHALL HE HANDED OVER TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAVING JURISDICTION OVER SUCH OTHER PERSON AND THAT ASSESS ING OFFICER SHALL PROCEED AGAINST EACH SUCH OTHER PERSON AND ISSUE SUCH OTHER PERSON NOTICE AND ASSESS OR REASSESS INCOME OF SUCH OTHER PERSON IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 153 A: PROVIDED THAT IN CASE OF SUCH OTHER PERSON, THE REFERENCE TO THE DATE OF INITIATION OF THE SEARCH UNDER SECTION 132 OR MAKING OF REQUISITION UNDER SECTION 132A IN THE SECOND PROVISO TO SUB - SECTION (I) OF SECTION 153A SHALL BE CONSTRUED AS REFERENCE TO THE DATE OF RECEIVING THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OR DOCUMENTS OR ASSET S SEIZED OR REQUISITIONED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAVING JURISDICTION OVER SUCH OTHER PERSON. 3.1. ON PERUSAL OF THE SECTION 153C OF THE ACT, IT MAY KINDLY BE NOTICED THAT THE SAID SECTION PROVIDES THAT WHERE THE ASSESSING OFFICER OF THE PERSON IN WHOSE CASE SEARCH WAS CONDUCTED IS SATISFIED THAT ANY MONEY, BULLION, JEWELLERY OR OTHER VALUABLE ARTICLES OR THINGS OR BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS OF DOCUMENTS SEIZED/ REQUISITIONED BELONGS TO SOME OTHER PERSON, THEN IT (SS) A NO S . 136/CTK/2018 4 SUCH BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS OR DOCUMENTS OR ASSETS SEIZED S HALL BE HANDED OVER TO THE AO HAVING JURISDICTION OVER SUCH OTHER PERSON. HERE THE WORD 'BELONGS' REFERS TO ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIALS BELONGING TO THE ASSESSEE (IN WHOSE CASE PROCEEDINGS U/S 153C OF THE ACT IS TO BE INITIATED). IN SUCH CASES IT IS PRERE QUISITE THAT THE AO OF THE PERSON, IN WHOSE CASE SEARCH WAS CONDUCTED, MUST BE SATISFIED THAT THE SEIZED DOCUMENTS WHICH ARE OF INCRIMINATING NATURE BELONG OR BELONGS TO THE ASSESSEE WHO IS GOING TO BE PROCEEDED AGAINST SECTION 153C OF THE ACT. IN THIS REG ARD IT IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED THAT THE MERE FACT THAT CERTAIN DOCUMENTS RELATING TO THE ASSESSEE WERE FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH IN CASE OF A THIRD PARTY DOES NOT, IPSO FACTO, GIVES JURISDICTION TO AO OF THE ASSESSEE TO ISSUE NOTICE U/S 153C OF T HE PROVISION OF SECTION 153C CANNOT BE APPLIED IN A CASE WHEN NO INCRIMINATING DOCUMENTS RELATING TO THE ASSESSEE WERE FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH. INCRIMINATING MATERIAL REFLECTING SOME UNDISCLOSED INCOME IS NECESSARY FOR THE PURPOSE OF INITIATING A NY PROCEEDINGS U/S 153C OF THE ACT. 4. IN CONNECTION TO THE ABOVE, RELIANCE IS PLACED, AS ALSO RELIED UPON BY THE ID. CIT(A) ON THE JUDGEMENT OF THE HON'BLE PUNE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF SINHGAD TECHNICAL EDUCATION SOCIETY VS. ACIT (2011) 57 DTR 024 1. FACTS: SEARCH AND SEIZURE ASSESSMENT UNDER S. 153C ABSENCE OF INCRIMINATING MATERIAL WHERE NO ASSESSMENT YEAR SPECIFIC INCRIMINATING MATERIAL OR DOCUMENT IS FOUND, ASSESSMENTS OF SUCH ASSESSMENT YEARS CANNOT BE DISTURBED BY INVOKING THE PROVISIONS OF S . 153C SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERATION UNDER S. 132 WAS CARRIED OUT IN THE CASE OF N, PRESIDENT OF THE ASSESSEE - SOCIETY AO ISSUED NOTICE UNDER S. 153C TO THE ASSESSEE AFTER RECORDING THE REASONS ON THE BASIS OF LOOSE PAPERS SEIZED FROM N AND EVENTUALLY MADE A SSESSMENT BY DENYING EXEMPTION UNDER S. 11 IMPUGNED REASONS MENTIONED BY THE AO ARE SILENT INSOFAR AS DISCOVERY OF ANY ASSESSMENT YEAR SPECIFIC INCRIMINATING INFORMATION RELATING TO THE ASSESSEE IS CONCERNED SATISFACTION NOTE RECORDED BY THE AO IS VERY GEN ERAL ONE REASONS RECORDED BY THE AO DO NOT CONTAIN ANYTHING INCRIMINATING FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS UPTO 2003 - 04 THERE IS NO MENTION OF ANY DOCUMENT RELATABLE TO FOUR YEARS IN QUESTION AND THUS INCRIMINATING NATURE OF THE SAME IS OUT OF QUESTION CONCLUDED A SSESSMENTS CANNOT BE DISTURBED MERELY FOR MAKING ROUTINE ADDITIONS THEREFORE, ORDER PASSED BY THE AO UNDER S. 153C IS BAD IN LAW HELD: THE IMPUGNED REASONS MENTIONED BY THE AO ARE SILENT INSOFAR AS ANY ASSESSMENT YEAR - SPECIFIC - INCRIMINATING - INFORMATION OR OTHERS LE. UNACCOUNTED OR UNDISCLOSED OR HIDDEN INFORMATION TO THE REVENUE BY THE ASSESSEE. THE IMPUGNED SATISFACTION NOTE IS VERY GENERAL ONE FOR SIX YEARS. IT IS SURPRISING TO NOTE THAT THE AO HAS NARRATED SOME INFORMATION AGAINST THE HUF OFN, PRESIDENT OF THE ASSESSEE - SOCIETY, WHICH IS NOT RELEVANT FOR THE PRESENT ASSESSEE. IN THE PROCESS, THE AO TOTALLY MISSED THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE LAW I. E. ONLY THE ASSESSMENT YEAR WITH THE PENDING ASSESSMENTS AND THE ASSESSMENT YEAR WITH THE ASSESSMENT YEAR SPECIFI C IT (SS) A NO S . 136/CTK/2018 5 INCRIMINATING DOCUMENTS/TRANSACTIONS OR SEIZED ASSET SHOULD ONLY BE REOPENED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE FIRST PROVISO TO S. 153 A AND NOT OTHERWISE. THE REASONS RECORDED BY THE AO DO NOT CONTAIN ANYTHING INCRIMINATING FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS UPTO 2003 - 04. THERE IS NO MENTION OF ANY DOCUMENT IN THE SAID REASONS RELATABLE TO THE FOUR YEARS IN QUESTION AND THE INCRIMINATING NATURE OF THE SAME IS OUT OF QUESTION. WHERE NO ASSESSMENT YEAR AND ASSESSEE SPECIFIC INCRIMINATING 'MONEY, JEWELLERY OR OTHER VALUABL E ARTICLE OR THING OR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OR DOCUMENTS' IS FOUND, THE ASSESSMENTS FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS CANNOT BE DISTURBED. FURTHER, THE CONCLUDED ASSESSMENTS SHOULD NOT BE DISTURBED MERELY FOR MAKING ROUTINE ADDITIONS, WHICH COULD HAVE BEEN OTHERWISE DONE IN THE REGULAR ASSESSMENT AND OF COURSE, THE PENDING ASSESSMENTS FALL UNDER EXCEPTIONS. KUMAR & CO. (ITA NO. 463/PN/2008, DL. 2ND FEB., 2010) AND LMJ INTERNATIONAL LTD. VS. DY. CTT (2008) 119 TTJ (KOL) 214 : (2008) 14 DTR (KOL TR IB) 540 FOLLOWED; KUMAR & CO. (ITA NO. 1020/PN/2008, DT. 2ND FEB., 2010) DISTINGUISHED. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF IT AT, PUNE, THE REVENUE WENT IN APPEAL BEFORE THE HON'BLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT. THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE AND OBSERVED THAT, 'THE TRIBUNAL' S CONCLUSION CANNOT BE TERMED AS PERVERSE AND GIVEN THE ABOVE NOTED FACTUAL BACKGROUND. NONE OF THESE APPEALS RAISES ANY SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW. THEY ARE ACCORDINGLY DISMISSED. ' AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF HIGH COURT, THE REVENUE WENT IN APPEAL BEFORE THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT. DISMISSING THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE, THE HON'BLE APEX COURT VIDE ORDER DATED 29/08 2017 REPORTED IN (2017) 397 ITR 344 (SC). HELD THAT. - J.R. MODI FINANCE (P) LTD., NEW ... VS ASSESSEE ON 6 JUNE, 2016 - ITA NO.5116?'DEL/201 3 - ITAT, DELHI. 'RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE JUDGEMENT OF HON'BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF RRJ SECURITIES (SUPRA), AND THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND PROVISIONS OF SECTION 153C OF THE ACT DISCUSSED ABOVE AND THE UNDISPUTED FACT THAT NO INCRIMINA TING MATERIAL WAS FOUND IN RESPECT OF OTHER THAN SEARCHED PERSON I.E. THE APPELLANT AND FOLLOWING THE PRINCIPLES LAID DOWN IN THE CASE OF KABUL CHAWLA (SUPRA), TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE, WE ALLOW BOTH THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL. 6. THEREFORE THE ANALY SIS OF SECTION 153C OF THE ACT AND RELEVANT JUDGEMENTS ON THE SAME MAKES IT AMPLY CLEAR THAT JURISDICTION OF ASSESSING OFFICER OF THE ASSESSEE VEST ONLY WHEN THE SATISFACTION OF AO, OF THE PERSON IN WHOSE CASE SEARCH WAS CONDUCTED, IS RECORDED THAT THE SEI ZED DOCUMENT WHICH ARE INCRIMINATING IN NATURE BELONG OR BELONGS TO THE ASSESSEE SO AS TO INITIATE PROCEEDINGS U/S 153C OF THE ACT FOR EACH YEARS FOR WHICH SATISFACTION IS RECORDED FOR ISSUANCE OF NOTICES U/S 153C. IN ABSENCE OF ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIAL RELATING TO THE ASSESSEE, NO ASSESSMENT U/S 153C OF THE ACT CAN BE FRAMED. 7. THUS, IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, IT IS HUMBLY REQUESTED BEFORE YOUR HONOURS TO DISMISS THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE DEPARTMENT. IT (SS) A NO S . 136/CTK/2018 6 IN ADDITION TO THE ABOVE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS, LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT(A) HAS RIGHTLY ANNULLED THE ASSESSMENT FRAMED U/S.153C OF THE ACT AS THERE IS NO INCRIMINATING MATERIAL FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH. THEREFORE, LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) DESERVES TO BE UPHELD AND APPEAL O F THE REVENUE SHOULD BE DISMISSED. 7. AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSING THE ENTIRE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD AS WELL AS THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW, WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSMENT WAS FRAMED BY THE AO U./S.153C OF THE A CT OBSERVING THAT DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERATION CERTAIN BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS CONTAINING LOOSE BUNDLES IDENTIFIED AS BNAH - 01 & BNAH - 02 WERE FOUND WHICH RELATE TO THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINED THE SAME, HOWEVER, THE AO DID NOT CONVINCE WITH THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE. IN APPEAL, THE CIT(A) ANNULLED THE ASSESSMENT COMPLETED U/S.153C OF THE ACT OBSERVING AS UNDER : - 3.7 I HAVE CAREFULLY EXAMINED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND SUBMISSIONS OF THE APPELLANT. IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE HERE THAT SECTION 153A OF I.T. ACT, 1961 IS FOR NOTICE AND ASSESSMENT IN THE CASE OF A 'SEARCHED PERSON'. WHEREAS, NOTICE AND ASSESSMENT U/S.L53C OF I.T. ACT, 1961, IS IN RESPECT OF 'OTHER PERSON', WHEREIN, INCRIMINATING MATERIAL IS SEIZED DURING THE COURS E OF SEARCH IN THE CASE OF A 'SEARCHED PERSON'. FOR NOTICE AND ASSESSMENT U/S.L53C, THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, PROVIDES THAT UNDISCLOSED ASSETS BELONGING TO 'OTHER PERSON' OR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT, DOCUMENTS OR ANY INFORMATION HAVING A BEARING ON THE DETERMINATI ON OF THE TOTAL INCOME OF SUCH 'OTHER PERSON' SHOULD BE SEIZED DURING A SEARCH ON ' SEARCHED PERSON'. I HAVE CAREFULLY EXAMINED THE DOCUMENTS BNAH - 01, BNAH - 02 AND BNRO - 18 AND IT IS SEEN THAT THERE IS NOT A SHRED OF INCRIMINATING MATERIAL AGAINST THE APPELL ANT. THE JUDICIAL OPINION ON THE ISSUE OF NOTICE AND FRAMING OF ASSESSMENT U/S.L53C OF I.T. ACT, 1961, IS THAT THE ASSETS OR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OR DOCUMENTS OR INFORMATION RELATING TO/PERTAINING TO THE 'OTHER PERSON' MUST BE INCRIMINATING IN IT (SS) A NO S . 136/CTK/2018 7 NATURE. THE APPE LLANT HAS RELIED UPON SEVERAL JUDGMENTS WHICH ARE REPRODUCED IN PARAGRAPH 3.5 ABOVE. IN PARTICULAR, THE DECISIONS IN THE CASE OF SINHGAD TECHNICAL EDUCATION SOCIETY BY HON'BLE TRIBUNAL, PUNE, BY HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AND BY HON'BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA HAVE BEEN RELIED UPON BY THE APPELLANT. THESE DECISIONS ARE SQUARELY APPLICABLE TO THE CASE OF THE APPELLANT. 3.8 CONSIDERING THESE FACTS AND JUDGMENTS OF VARIOUS COURTS, IN PARTICULAR, THE DECISION OF HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF SINHGAD TE CHNICAL EDUCATION SOCIETY (SUPRA), I AM OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT, IN THE ABSENCE OF INCRIMINATING MATERIAL IN THE CASE OF THE APPELLANT, THE ASSESSMENT FRAMED U / S .153C OF I.T. ACT, 1961 BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS BAD IN LAW AND IT IS ANNULLED. 8. WHI LE DEALING WITH THE ISSUE, THE CIT(A) EXAMINED THE DOCUMENTS REFERRED TO BY THE AO I.E. BNAH - 01, BNAH - 02 AND BNRO - 18 AND FOUND THAT THERE IS NOT A SHRED OF INCRIMINATING MATERIAL AGAINST THE ASSESSEE. THE JUDICIAL OPINION ON THE ISSUE OF NOTICE AND FRAMING OF ASSESSMENT U/S. 1 53C OF I.T. ACT, 1961, IS THAT THE ASSETS OR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OR DOCUMENTS OR INFORMATION RELATING TO/PERTAINING TO THE 'OTHER PERSON' MUST BE INCRIMINATING IN NATURE. THEREAFTER THE CIT(A) ANNULLED THE ASSESSMENT FRAMED BY THE AO U/S.1 53C OF THE ACT RELYING ON THE DECISION OF HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. SINHGAD TECHNICAL EDUCATION SOCIETY, [2017] 84 TAXMANN.COM 290 (SC). LD. DR BEFORE US UNABLE TO CONTROVERT THE ABOVE FINDINGS RECORDED BY THE CIT(A) BY BRINING ANY COGEN T MATERIAL EVIDENCE. THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED RETURN OF INCOME U/S.139(1) OF THE ACT ON 22.11.2011 DECLARING INCOME OF RS.46,450/ - AND IN PURSUANT TO SEARCH, HE FILED RETURN OF INCOME ON 20.04.2015 DECLARING THE SAME. WE ALSO NOTICED THAT ON THE DATE OF SEA RCH OR SATISFACTION RECORDED , THERE IS NO ANY IOTA OF EVIDENCE THAT THE IT (SS) A NO S . 136/CTK/2018 8 ASSESSMENT WAS PENDING BEFORE THE REVENUE DEPARTMENT. ACCORDINGLY, WE HAVE NO HESITATION BUT TO UPHOLD THE FINDINGS OF THE CIT(A) ANNULLING THE ASSESSMENT COMPLETED U/S.153C OF THE ACT IN ABSENCE OF ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIAL. THUS, THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE ARE DISMISSED AND CONSEQUENTLY, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 9 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 20/02 /20 20 . S D/ - ( C.M.GARG ) SD/ - (L.P.SAHU) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER CUTTACK; DATED 20/02 /20 20 PRAKASH KUMAR MISHRA, SR.P.S. / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : / BY ORDER, ( SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY ) ITAT CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK 1. / THE APPELLANT - DCIT, CENTR AL CIRCLE, SAMBALPUR 2. / THE RESPONDENT - M/S ROMASS VINIMAY PVT. LTD OF OM NIWAS, BARSUAN, SUNDERGARH, ODISHA - 770041 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A), 4. / CIT 5. , , / DR, ITAT, CUTTA CK 6. / GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY//