MALA RAM,SURAT vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-20, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1251/DEL/2023Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 January 2025AY 2019-20Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman (Accountant Member)3 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that since cash was seized during a search, the assessment should have been framed under Section 153C(1)(a) and not under Section 143(3). The assessment framed under Section 143(3) was therefore invalid.

What were the facts?

During a search action, cash of Rs. 85,00,000/- was seized from the assessee's locker. The assessment was framed under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act.

What were the issues?

Whether an assessment framed under Section 143(3) is valid when cash was seized during a search and the case falls under Section 153C(1)(a).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 153C(1)(a),Section 132

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘E’, NEW DELHI

Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman

Hearing: 28.01.2025Pronounced: 28.01.2025

Asstt. Year: 2019-20 Mala Ram, Vs ACIT, 197, Keshav Park Society, Central Circle-20, Godadara, Surat, New Delhi Gujarat-395010 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AMNPR1215P Assessee by : Sh. Mala Ram (Assessee) Revenue by : Sh. Arvind Kumar Trivedi, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 28.01.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 28.01.2025 ORDER

Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member:

1.

This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2019-20, arises against the CIT(A)-27, New Delhi’s case No. CIT(A), Delhi-27/10825/2018-19 dated 28.02.2023, in proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

2.

Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.

3.

It emerges at the outset that there arises the first and foremost issue of validity of the impugned assessment framed u/s 143(3) of the Act dated 16.06.2021 itself. This is for the precise reason that the learned departmental authorities had Mala Ram carried out a search action dated 06.12.2018 in case of M/s Faquir Chand Lockers and Vaults Pvt. Ltd. group of cases wherein they are stated to have come across the assessee’s locker No. 175 and seized cash of Rs.85,00,000/-. The moot question which arises in this factual backdrop is that once the cash has been seized during the course of search herein which belonged to the assessee, the case was covered under the specific provision attracting section 153C(1)(a) than the procedure of normal assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act. We further quote section 153C(1) first proviso that the date of search in such a case is the date of recording the relevant satisfaction thereunder in light of PCIT vs. Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd. (2024) (4) TMI 268 (Del).

4.

We accordingly conclude that given the fact that it was an instance of search and seizure u/s 132 of the Act, learned lower authorities have erred in law and on facts in framing assessment in the assessee’s case u/s 143(3) of the Act. The same stand quashed in very terms.

5.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 28/01/2025.

More judgments on Section 132

All 14,598 judgments and leading authorities on Section 132 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →