Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's case for AY 2013-14 was reopened under Section 147/148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, following information from a search on the Bunka Group (a third party) that revealed the assessee received ₹1.00 Cr in bogus unsecured loans from a shell company. The Ld. AO treated this as unexplained cash credit under Section 68. The assessee challenged the reopening, contending that proceedings should have been initiated under Section 153C/153A as the information arose from a search action.
Held
The Tribunal held that when information relating to an assessee is found during a search on a third party, assessment proceedings for that assessee must be initiated under the special provisions of Section 153C read with Section 153A, which override general provisions like Section 147/148. Citing various High Court and Supreme Court judgments, the Tribunal concluded that the reopening of assessment under Section 147/148 was without jurisdiction and invalid, thereby quashing the assessment order.
Key Issues
Whether the assessment proceedings against an assessee, where incriminating material concerning them is discovered during a search on a third party, should be initiated under Section 147/148 or under the specific search assessment provisions of Section 153C read with Section 153A of the Income Tax Act.
Sections Cited
147, 148, 144B, 153C, 153A, 68, 142(1), 132, 132A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, KOLKATA
This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 06.05.2024 for the AY 2013-14.
The assessee has challenged the appellate order passed by the ld. CIT (A) on various legal issues as well as on merit.
The first legal issue raised by the assessee is as under:-
(i) That the assessment order dated 30.03.2022 passed u/s 147/144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) being based on invalid notice issued u/s 148 of the Act dated 31.03.2201, which is in violation of provisions of Section 153C of the Act.
In the appellate proceedings, the appeal was dismissed on legal issue by the ld. CIT (A) by holding that the d AO has received information that assessee has received an unsecured loan of ₹1.00 Cr from the
The ld. AR vehemently submitted before us that the reopening of assessment by the ld. AO u/s 147 read with section 148 of the Act is invalid and void ab initio as the source of so-called credible information was the search action u/s 132 of the Act conducted on Shri Mukesh Banka and his group of companies, which were managed and operated by shri Mukesh Bunka. The ld. AR submitted that it is only on the basis of records/ materials found and seized during the course of search that contained the information qua the assessee having been beneficiary of the bogus unsecured loans of ₹1.00 crores. The ld. AR therefore, prayed that in this case, the special provision has been provided in the Act to initiate the assessment proceedings and to frame the assessment order which is contained in section 153C of the Act. The ld. AR submitted that the provisions of Sections 153C of the of the begins with non-obstante, which provides that notwithstanding anything contained in section 139, section 147, section 148, section 149, section 151 and section 153, where the AO is satisfied that-(a) any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing, seized or requisitioned, belongs to or (b) any books of account or documents, seized or requisitioned, pertains or pertain to, or any information contained therein relates to, a person other than the person referred to in section 153A, then, the books of account or documents or assets, seized or requisitioned shall be handed over to the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction over such other person and that Assessing Officer shall proceed against each such other person and issue notice u/s 153C and assess or reassess the income of the other person in accordance with the provisions of section 153A, if, that
The ld. DR on the other hand relied on the order of the ld. lower authorities by submitting that in this case the credible information was received from the investigation wing that assessee is a beneficiary of bogus unsecured loans, accommodation entries to the tune of ₹1.00 crore and accordingly, the reopening of assessment was made u/s 147 read with section 148 of the Act which is rightly been upheld by the ld. CIT (A). Therefore, the legal ground raised by the assessee is devoid of any merit and kindly be dismissed.
After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that undisputedly, the source of “12. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and with their assistance, we have perused the record. At the outset, we may observe that the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer to issue the impugned notice would be required to be considered on the basis of the departmental record and on such basis, the relevant provisions of law which would govern the facts and circumstances of the case in the hands of the Assessing Officer. In the present case, the impugned notice under Section 148 of the IT. Act was issued to the petitioner on 29 March, 2019. The petitioner received a copy
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 01.04.2025.