The ACIT, Circle-3, Ahmedabad V. Shri Dipak Fulchand Jain, Ahmedabad

ITSSA 470/AHD/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9495 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 6 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-11-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 21-11-2013
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 04-05-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: T P KRISHANA KUMAR
• Keywords: Block assessment
• Section: 143(3); 132; 15

Judgement Text

IT(SS)A NO 470 & 471/AHD/2010 . BLOCK PERIOD 1/0 4/1996 TO 25/- 7/2002 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, AHMEDABAD (BEFORE SHRI G.C.GUPTA VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI ANIL C HATURVEDI, A.M.) I.T.(SS) A. NO. 470 & 471/AHD/2010 (BLOCK PERIOD:1/4 /1996 TO 25.07.2002) THE A.C.I.T CIRCLE-3, AHMEDABAD V/S DIPAK FULCHAND JAIN E-21, AKASH APPARTMENT, NR. PREMCHANDNAGAR BODAKDEV, AHMEDABAD PAN NO. ADYPJ4795N (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) THE A.C.I.T CIRCLE-3, AHMEDABAD V/S SHRI SHAILESH FULCHAND JAIN A-21, AKASH APPARTMENT, NR. PREMCHANDNAGAR BODAKDEV, AHMEDABAD PAN NO. AAOPJ8254 D (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI T.P. KRISHANA KUMAR CIT D.R. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI TUSHAR HEMANI ( )/ ORDER DATE OF HEARING : 21-11-20 13 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 29 -11-2013 PER SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI,A.M. 1. THESE APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A), GANDHINAGAR DATED 24.02.2010 FOR BLOCK PERIOD 01.04 .96 TO 25.07.3002. IT(SS)A NO 470 & 471/AHD/2010 . BLOCK PERIOD 1/0 4/1996 TO 25/- 7/2002 2 2. BEFORE US BOTH THE PARTIES SUBMITTED THAT THOUGH TH E APPEALS ARE OF 2 DIFFERENT ASSESSEES BUT THEY ARISE OUT OF THE SAME SEARCH ACTION AND THEREFORE THE ISSUES IN BOTH THE APPEALS ARE IDENTI CAL EXCEPT FOR THE AMOUNT. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE SUBMISSIO NS MADE BY THEM IN CASE OF ONE WOULD BE EQUALLY APPLICABLE TO THE OTHE R CASE AND THEREFORE BOTH THE APPEALS CAN BE HEARD TOGETHER. WE THEREFOR E PROCEED TO DECIDE BOTH THE APPEALS BY A CONSOLIDATED ORDER FOR THE SA KE OF CONVENIENCE AND THUS PROCEED WITH THE FACTS IN THE CASE OF IT(SS)A NO. 470/AHD/2010 (DEEPAK PHULCHAN JAIN). 3. THE RELEVANT FACTS AS CULLED OUT FROM THE MATERIAL ON RECORD ARE AS UNDER: 4. A SEARCH OPERATION UNDER SECTION 132 OF THE ACT WAS CARRIED OUT AT THE PREMISES OF SHRI PURSHOTTAM S. MULTANI ON 25.07.200 2 AND THE SEIZED MATERIAL REVEALED AN INVESTMENT OF RS. 25 LACS IN C ASH IN STERLING RESORTS LTD BY SHRI MULTANI. THE ASSESSING OFFICER OF SHRI MULTANI INTIMATED TO ITO OF THE ASSESSEE THAT SHRI MULTANI HAD EXPLAINED THAT OUT OF INVESTMENT OF RS. 25 LAKHS, RS. 10 LAKHS WAS INVEST ED IN CASH BY SHRI DIPAK PHULCHAND JAIN AND RS. 7 LAKHS BY SHRI SHAILE SH PHULCHAND JAIN. THE A.O. FURTHER INFORMED THAT BOTH THESE PERSONS W ERE PARTNERS OF SHRI MULTANI IN THE PROJECT OF STERLING RESORTS LTD. HE ACCORDINGLY VIDE LETTER DATED 23.03.2007 TRANSFERRED THE CORRESPONDENCE/ DO CUMENTS TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER OF THE ASSESSEE UNDER PRESENT APP EAL. CONSEQUENTLY, NOTICE UNDER SECTION 158 BD READ WITH SECTION 158BC WAS ISSUED ON ASSESSEE 19.07.2007 AND WAS SERVED ON ASSESSEE ON 3 1.07.2007 ASKING THE ASSESSEE TO FILE THE RETURN OF INCOME. ASSESSEE FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME FOR BLOCK ASSESSMENT ON 15.07.2009 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS. IT(SS)A NO 470 & 471/AHD/2010 . BLOCK PERIOD 1/0 4/1996 TO 25/- 7/2002 3 15,96,505/- INCLUDING UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF RS. 10 LAKHS. THEREAFTER ASSESSMENT WAS FRAMED UNDER SECTION 158BD READ WITH SECTION 158BC AND 143(3) OF THE ACT VIDE ORDER DATED 30.07.2009 A ND THE TOTAL INCOME DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS ACCEPTED. SUBSEQUENTL Y BEFORE CIT(A) ASSESSEE CHALLENGED THE PROCEEDINGS INITIATED UNDER SECTION 158 BD OF THE ACT AS WELL AS BLOCK ASSESSMENT COMPLETED UNDER SECTION 158BD READ WITH SECTION 143(3) OF THE ACT. CIT(A) VIDE ORDER DATED 25.02.2010 ALLOWED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE BY HOLDING AS UN DER:- 6. THE MATTER HAS BEEN CONSIDERED. FROM THE FACTS A S AVAILABLE IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND AS ALSO BROUGHT OUT BY THE ASSESSEE, IT IS CLEAR THAT THE A SSESSING OFFICER OF SHRI P.S. MULTANI HAS CONVEYED HIS SATISFACTION OF THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF THE APPEL LANT ONLY ON 23.03.2007. THIS DATE HAS TO BE SEEN IN CONTEXT OF THE DATE OF THE SEARCH, WHICH WAS 25.07. 2002 AND THE DATE OF COMPLETION OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS U/S. 158BC ON 30.07.2004. 7. THE ITAT, AHMEDABAD BENCH IN THE CASE OF JAYANTI LAL P. PATEL, AS REFERRED TO BY THE AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE, RELYING ON THE DECISION OF IT AT SP ECIAL BENCH IN THE CASE OF MANOJ AGGARWAL VS. DCIT 138 ITD 337, CAME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT AS PE R THE SCHEME OF THE ACT, THE SATISFACTION OF THE ORIGINAL ASSESSING OFFICER ABOUT INFORMATION OF UND ISCLOSED INCOME PERTAINING TO A THIRD PERSON, HAS T O BE RECORDED BEFORE THE COMPLETION OF THE ASSESSMENT U/S.158BC. AS STATED EARLIER, THE ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S.!58BC WAS PASSED ON 30/07/2004. THERE IS NO EVIDENCE ON RECORD REGARDING THE FACT THAT THE ORIGINAL ASSESSING OFFICER I.E. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCL E-1(3), AHMEDABAD HAS RECORDED HIS SATISFACTION EITHER IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER OR OTHERWISE, PRIOR TO HIS INTIMATION TO THE ITO, WARD-3(L), AHMEDABAD ON 23/03/2007. THE ITAT IN ITS ORDER HAS QUOTED IN DETAIL THE REASONING GIVEN BY THE SPECIAL BENCH IN THE CASE OF MANOJ AGGARWAL (SUPRA) IN PARAS 123 TO 127 TO HOLD THE VIEW THAT IT HELD. FOR THE PURPOSE OF COMPLETENESS, THE SAID PORTION OF THE DECISION O F ITAT AHMEDABAD IS BEING REPRODUCED BELOW: '10. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND GONE T HROUGH THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. WE HAVE ALSO PERUSED THE CASE RECORDS INCLUDING THE BL OCK ASSESSMENT ORDERS AND THE ORDERS OF CIT(A) IN ALL THESE APPEALS. WE FIND THAT THE SEARCH U/S. 132 OF THE ACT WAS CONDUCTED ON THE BUSINESS & RESIDENTIAL PREMISES OFBHAGAWATI GROUP OF CASES INC LUDING SHRI NARENDRA SOMANI AND THEBLOCK ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED IN THEIR CASES ON 28-02-20 02. THE AC OF THE BHAGAWATI GROUP -WHILE COMPLETING BLOCK ASSESSMENTU/S.L58BC OF THE ACT ON 28-02-2002, DRAWN A SATISFACTION NOTE AND HANDED OVER THE SAME TO THE AC OF THESE ASSESSEE (THE ASSE SSEE'S IN PRESENT APPEALS). ACCORDINGLY, NOTICE U/S.158BD OF THE ACT IN ALL THESE APPEALS WERE ISSU ED ON 29-08-2002 AND THE BLOCK ASSESSMENT U/S.158BD R.W.S. 158BC R.W.S. 143(3) OF THE ACT WAS FRAMED. THE ADDITIONAL ISSUE RAISED BY THE THESE ASSESSEE IN ALL THEIR COS AS REGARDS TO TIME BARRIN G OF THE NOTICE ISSUED U/S. 158BD OF THE ACT AND BLOCK ASSESSMENT FRAMED THEREIN, IS PURELY A LEGAL ISSUE, HENCE, THE SAME IS ADMITTED AND IS BEING ADJUDICATED. WE FIND THAT THIS ISSUE IS SQUARELY CO VERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AND AGAINST THE REVENUE IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE GIVEN FACTS. THIS ISSU E IS COVERED BY THE FULL BENCH DECISION OF THIS TRIBUNAL I.E., DELHI BENCH IN THE CASE OF MANOJ AGG ARWAL (SUPRA). WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE DECISION OF MANOJ AGGARWAL (SUPRA), WHEREIN IT IS HELD AS UN DER:- '113. SECTION 158BD COMMENCES WITH THE WORDS 'WHERE THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS SATISFIED THAT ANY UNDISCLOSED INCOME BELONGS TO ANY PERSON, OTHER THA N THE PERSON WITH RESPECT TO WHOM SEARCH WAS MADE' AND THUS IT IS CLEAR THAT THE SATISFACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER ASSESSING THE PERSON SEARCHE D IS THE FIRST AND FOREMOST REQUIREMENT. THE ASSESSING O FFICER CAN ARRIVE AT THIS SATISFACTION ONLY AFTER ASCERTAINING WHETHER THERE IS ANY UNDISCLOSED INCOM E AT ALL AND THIS FINDING CAN BE ARRIVED AT BY HIM ONLY IN THE COURSE OF THE SECTION 158BD ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING. THEREAFTER, HE HAS TO ARRIVE AT A FINDING AS TO THE PERSON TO WHOM SUCH INCOME BELONG S. THIS FINDING ALSO CAN BE ARRIVED AT ONLY IN THE COURSE OF THE SECTION 158BC PROCEEDING IN THE CASE OF THE PERSON SEARCHED. HE MAY FIND THAT PART OF IT(SS)A NO 470 & 471/AHD/2010 . BLOCK PERIOD 1/0 4/1996 TO 25/- 7/2002 4 THE SAID UNDISCLOSED INCOME BELONGS TO THE PERSON S EARCHED AND THE REST BELONGS TO OTHER PERSON OR PERSONS. AT THIS STAGE, HE HAS TO GIVE A FINDING IN THIS BEHALF AS TO WHICH OF THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME BELONGS TO THE PERSON TO WHOM THE REST OF THE INCOM E BELONGS. THIS FINDING TOO HAS TO BE ARRIVED AT IN THE COURSE OF THE SECTION 158BC PROCEEDING. AFTER A RRIVING AT THIS FINDING, HE MAKES AN ASSESSMENT OF THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME RELATING TO' THE PERSON SEAR CHED IN HIS HANDS AND HANDS OVER THE MATERIAL RELATING TO THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME BELONGING TO THE OTHER PERSON OR PERSONS TO THE RESPECTIVE ASSESSIN G OFFICER. AS SECTION 158BC PROCEEDING IS SPECIFICALL Y INTENDED FOR DETERMINING THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME, THE. MATERIAL UNEARTHED HAS TO BE EXAMINED IN THE C OURSE OF THE SAID PROCEEDING AND IF SUCH EXAMINATION SHOWS THAT THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME BELON GS TO SOME OTHER PERSONS A FINDING IN THIS BEHALF HAS TO BE RECORDED IN THE COURSE OF THE SECTION 158 BC PROCEEDING AS SUCH FINDING HAS TO FORM AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE. SAID PROCEEDING AND IN CONFOR MITY WITH THE INTENTION BEHIND THE SAID PROVISION S O, IT IS ESSENTIAL THAT SUCH FINDING HAS TO FORM . PAR T OF THE SECTION 158BC PROCEEDING AND SO MUST FIND A PLACE IN THE ORDER UNDER SECTION 158BC. THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER ASSESSING THE PERSON SEARCHED HAS TO GIVE A FINDING ON EACH AND EVERY MATERIAL AND EVIDE NCE UNEARTHED AFTER A CAREFUL AND JUDICIOUS EVALUATION AND SUCH EXERCISE INVOLVES A FINDING THA T THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME BELONGS TO A SPECIFIED PERSON AS FOUND BY HIM ON THE SECTION 158BD PROCEED ING REVOLVES. IF, THEREFORE, IN THE COURSE OF THE SECTION 158BC PROCEEDINGS THE ASSESSING OFFICER ASS ESSING THE PERSON SEARCHED DOES NOT GIVE A FINDING THAT ANY PART OF THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME UNEARTHED B ELONGS TO A PERSON OTHER THAN THE PERSON SEARCHED, SECTION 158BD CAN NEVER BE INVOKED. IT IS THIS FIND ING THAT IS AN INTEGRAL PART OF BOTH THE PROCEEDING S WHETHER UNDER SECTION 158BC OR 158BD. FOR, SUCH FIN DING DETERMINES IN WHOSE HANDS THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME UNEARTHEDHAS TO BE TAXED. IF THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME BELONGS TO THE PERSON SEARCHED, HE IS SUBJECTED TO BLOCK ASSESSMENT ON SUCH INCOME UNDER SECTION 158BC BUT IF SUCH INCOME OR PART OF SUCH INCOME BELONGS TO A PERSON NOT SEARCHED, SECTION 15 8BD TAKES OVER. THIS IS THE ESSENCE OF THE ENTIRE ENACTMENT RELATING TO SEARCH.' 114. SECTION 158BE PROVIDES FOR TIME LIMIT FOR COMP LETION OF BLOCK ASSESSMENT: IT STIPULATES THAT THE ORDER UNDER SECTION 158BC SHALL BE PASSED WITHIN TW O YEARS FROM THE END OF THE MONTH IN WHICH THE LAST OF THE AUTHORIZATION FOR SEARCH UNDER SECTION 132 WAS EXECUTED OR FOR REQUISITION UNDER SECTION 132A AS THE CASE MAY BE AND SO THE ORDER ENVISAGED UNDER SECTION 158BC HAS NECESSARILY TO BE PASSED WITHIN THIS TIME SECTION 158BC HAS NECESSARILY TO B E PASSED WITHIN THIS TIME FRAME SATIN LAW, IF THERE IS A TIME LIMIT FOR PASSING OF SUCH ORDER, THERE IS AN IMPLIED TIME LIMIT FOR GIVING A FINDINGS AS TO THE PERSON TO WHOM THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME BELONGS WHICH UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES CAN BE BEYOND THE TIME-LIMIT SET IN SECTION 158BD. IF THERE IS NO SUC H FINDING GIVEN IN THE ORDER UNDER SECTION 158BC, T HE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 158BD STAND OUSTED AT THE EXP IRY OF THE SAID TIME LIMIT FOR THE REASON THAT SUCH A FINDING IS THE VERY BASIS FOR INVOKING SECTION 158B D. 115. SECTION 158BD AS SAID EARLIER BEGINS WITH THE EXPRESSION WHERE THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS SATISFIED AND SO VERY SECTION IMPLIES A RECORDING OF SATISFACTION. THE SATISFACTION CONTEMPLATED IS A JUDICIOUS SATISFACTION AND NOT A SUBJECTIVE SATISFA CTION AND UNLESS THE SAME IS RECORDED IT IS NOT POSSIBLE FOR ANY PERSON TO DISCERN WHETHER THE SATI SFACTION MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF LAW AT ALL. THE SATISFACTION CAN BE FOUND IN THE ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 158BC AND IF NO SUCH ORDER IS PASSED THEN IT WILL HAVE TO BE FOUND IN THE NOTE HANDING OVER T HE MATERIAL SEIZED TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER ASSESSI NG THE OTHER PERSON. IN ANY EVENT, IT HAS TO BE IN WRI TING AND IN VIEW OF SECTION 158BE, THE SAID RECORDI NG HAS TO BE MADE BEFORE THE TIME SET IN SECTION 158BE EXPIRES. AFTER THE SAID DATE, IT IS NOT POSSIBLE T O INVOKE SECTION 158BD AT ALL. A VIEW IS EXPRESSED THAT WHEREVER A TIME-LIMIT IS I NTENDED, THE PARLIAMENT HAS PROVIDED FOR THE SAME AND IN THE ABSENCE OF A SPECIFIC PROVISION MADE IN THIS RESPECT IT HAS TO BE ASSUMED THAT THERE IS NO TIME-LIMIT INTENDED IN LAW. IT HAS TO BE REMEMBERED THAT THE MATTER RELATES TO FIXING HUGE FINANCIAL A ND OTHER CIVIL LIABILITY ON THE PERSON AFFECTED AND IT HAS BEEN REPEATEDLY HELD THAT THERE MUST BE A FINA LITY TO ANY PROCEEDING UNDER THE ACT AND THAT A CONCLUDE D PROCEEDING CANNOT BE REOPENED AT THE WHIM AND FANCY OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITHOUT THE DUE PROC ESS OF LAW. STRICT INTERPRETATION OF FISCAL STATUTE S IS THE ORDER OF THE DAY AND AS THE PROVISIONS FOR SEAR CH ARE DRACONIAN IN NATURE SUCH PROVISIONS HAVE NECESSARILY TO BE STRICTLY CONSTRUED, WILL HAVE TO BE REMEMBERED THAT SECTION 158BD PRO VIDES FOR INVOKING JURISDICTION UNDER THE SAID SECTION EN ABLING THE ASSESSING OFFICER ASSESSING THE OTHER PERSON IN RESPECT OF WHOM THE ASSESSING OFFICER ASS ESSING THE PERSON SEARCHED GIVES A FINDING THAT THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME UNEARTHED AS A RESULT OF SEARCH BELONGS TO THE SAID PERSON AND ONCE SUCH A FINDING IS GIVEN THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 158BD COME INTO OPERATION. THIS, THEREFORE, INVOLVES ASSUMPTION O F JURISDICTION AND CANNOT BE CONSTRUCTED AS A PROCEDU RAL MATTER IN THE ABSENCE OF A FINDING IN THIS IT(SS)A NO 470 & 471/AHD/2010 . BLOCK PERIOD 1/0 4/1996 TO 25/- 7/2002 5 BEHALF, THERE IS NO JURISDICTION TO THE OTHER ASSES SING OFFICER AT ALL TO PROCEED FURTHER IN THE MATTE R. AS THE TIME-LIMIT SET IN SECTION 158BE APPLIES TO SUCH FINDING, IT IS ONLY LOGICAL THAT THE SAID TIME- LI MIT AUTOMATICALLY APPLIES FOR INVOKING THE PROVISIONS O F SECTION 158BD AND IT IS FOR THIS REASON THAT THE PARLIAMENT DID NOT FIND IT NECESSARY TO SPECIFY A S EPARATE TIME-LIMIT FOR THE SAME, AS THE ENACTMENT ITSELF SHOWS THAT BOTH SECTIONS 158BC AND 158BD ARE INTER-LINKED, INTERLACED AND INTER-WINDED AND BOTH FORM PART AND PARCEL OF THE SAME CHAPTER. ' 8. KEEPING THE ABOVE FINDING IN VIEW, IN THIS CASE , THEREFORE, THE SATISFACTION FOR INITIATION OF PROCEEDINGS U/S. 158BD SHOULD HAVE BEEN RECORDED BY 30.07.2004 BUT WAS DONE ONLY ON 23.03.2007. THEREFORE, IN LINE WITH THE ABOVE REFERRED ITATS D ECISION, IT IS HELD THAT THE BLOCK ASSESSMENT FRAME D U/S. 158BD IS BARRED BY LIMITATION AND THEREFORE TH E SAME IS QUASHED. 5. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF CIT(A), THE REVENUE IS N OW IN APPEAL BEFORE US AND HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- 1. THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN ALLOWIN G THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND HOLDING THAT THE PROCEEDINGS U/S. 158D TIME HAVE BEEN BARRE D BY LIMITATION AND THE ASSESSMENT ORDER WAS QUASHED. 2. THE CIT(A) IS ERRONEOUSLY ON MERITS AS THE SECTION DOES NOT PROVIDE FOR DRAWING THE SATISFACTION NOTE BEFORE COMPLETION OF BLOCK ASSESSMENT IN MAIN PERSON/GROUP IN CASE OF WHOM THE SEARCH ACTION WAS CARRIED OUT. THE PROCEEDINGS U/S. 158BD OF THE ACT ARE INDEPENDENT PROCEEDINGS BASED ON THE MATERIAL FOUND DURING THE SEARCH ACTION AND THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LINKING THE TWO. BOTH THE GROUNDS ARE INTERCONNECTED AND THEREFORE C ONSIDERED TOGETHER. 6. BEFORE US, THE LD. D.R. TOOK US THROUGH THE ORDER O F A.O. AND STRONGLY SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF A.O. HE ALSO PLACED ON RECOR D THE ORDER DATED 30.07.2004 PASSED U/S 158BC IN THE CASE OF PURSHOTT AM MULTANI AND POINTED TO THE PARA 7.2 OF THE ORDER WHERE THE A.O. HAS MENTIONED ABOUT THE CASH INVESTMENT BY SHRI DEEPAK JAIN AND SHAILES H JAIN. HE THEREFORE SUBMITTED THAT THE SATISFACTION RECORDED AT THE TIM E OF SEARCH IN CASE OF SHRI MULTANI SHOULD BE CONSIDERED AS THE SATISFACTI ON NOTE IN THE CASE OF ASSESSEE. THE LD. A.R. ON THE OTHER HAND SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF CIT(A). IT(SS)A NO 470 & 471/AHD/2010 . BLOCK PERIOD 1/0 4/1996 TO 25/- 7/2002 6 7. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. IT IS AN UNDISPUTED FACT THE SEARCH IN THE CASE OF P.S. MULTANI WAS CARRIED ON 25.07.2002 AND THE DATE OF COMPLETION OF ASSESSM ENT PROCEEDINGS IN HIS CASE UNDER SECTION 158BC WAS ON 30.07.2004 AND THE CORRESPONDENCE /DOCUMENT FOR INITIATION OF ACTION UNDER SECTION 15 8BD IN THE CASE OF ASSESSEE WAS TRANSFERRED TO THE ITO OF THE ASSESSEE ON 23.03.2007. NOTICE UNDER SECTION 158BD READ WITH SECTION 158BC WAS ISSUED ON 19.07.2007 AND SERVED ON ASSESSEE ON 31.07.2007. TH E ASSESSEE FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME FOR BLOCK PERIOD ON 15.07.2009 AND THE ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 158BD READ WITH SECTION 158BC AND 143 (3) OF THE ACT WAS FRAMED ON 30.07.2009. CIT(A) WHILE HOLDING THE BLOC K ASSESSMENT TO BE BARRED BY LIMITATION HAS NOTED THAT THE SATISFACTIO N FOR INITIATION OF PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 158BD SHOULD HAVE BEEN RE CORDED BEFORE 30.07.2004 BEING THE DATE OF COMPLETION OF ASSESSME NT PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 158BC IN THE CASE OF P.S. MULTANI BUT HOWEVER THE SAME WAS DONE ONLY ON 23.03.2007. HE HAS FURTHER NOTED T HAT THERE IS NO EVIDENCE ON RECORD TO SHOW THAT THE A.O. OF SHRI MU LTANI HAD RECORDED HIS SATISFACTION EITHER IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER OR OTHERWISE PRIOR TO HIS INTIMATION TO THE A.O. OF THE ASSESSEE ON 23.03.200 7. HE THEREFORE RELYING ON THE DECISION ON AHMEDABAD TRIBUNAL IN TH E CASE OF JAYANTILAL P. PATEL (SUPRA) HELD THE BLOCK ASSESSMENT FRAMED U NDER SECTION 158BD TO BE BARRED BY LIMITATION. 8. BEFORE US, THE LD. D.R. COULD NOT CONTROVERT THE FI NDINGS OF CIT(A) NOR HAS BROUGHT ANY CONTRARY MATERIAL ON RECORD IN ITS SUPPORT. IN VIEW OF THE AFORESAID FACTS, WE FIND NO REASON TO INTERFERE WIT H THE ORDER OF CIT(A) AND THUS THESE GROUNDS OF THE REVENUE ARE DISMISSED . IT(SS)A NO 470 & 471/AHD/2010 . BLOCK PERIOD 1/0 4/1996 TO 25/- 7/2002 7 IT(SS) A NO. 471/AHD/2010 (SHAILESH PHULCHAND JAIN) 9. BEFORE US, BOTH THE PARTIES HAVE SUBMITTED THAT THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE IDENTICAL TO THAT OF DIPAK PHULCHAND JAIN AND THE S UBMISSIONS MADE IN THE CASE OF DIPAK PHULCHAND JAIN ARE EQUALLY APPLICABLE IN THE PRESENT CASE. WE THEREFORE FOR REASONS GIVEN HEREINABOVE WHILE DE CIDING THE APPEAL IN THE CASE OF DIPAK PHULCHAND JAIN, ALSO DISMISS THE PRESENT APPEAL OF THE REVENUE. THUS THE GROUND OF REVENUE ARE ALSO DISMIS SED. 10. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF REVENUE ARE DISM ISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 29 - 11- 2013. SD/- SD/- (G.C.GUPTA) (ANIL CHATURVEDI) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD. TRUE COPY RAJESH COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: - 1. THE APPELLANT. 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT (APPEALS) 4. THE CIT CONCERNED. 5. THE DR., ITAT, AHMEDABAD. 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER DEPUTY/ASSTT.REGISTRAR ITAT,A HMEDABAD