SRI.A. KAMALUDEEN THANGAL,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE DCIT, TRIVANDRUM

PDF · subscribers
ITA 80/COCH/2021Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 October 2024AY 2009-10Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara (Judicial Member), Shri Amarjit Singh (Judicial 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 no assessments were pending as of the date of reference, additions could only be made based on seized material, as per the Supreme Court decision in PCIT vs. Abhisar Buildwell (P) Ltd. As no such additions were made, the assessments were quashed.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed six appeals against orders passed under section 143(3) read with section 153C of the Income Tax Act. The assessments were for the years 2006-07 to 2011-12, and notices under section 153C were issued on 29.10.2013.

What were the issues?

Whether assessments made under section 153C are valid when no assessments were pending at the time of reference and no additions were made based on seized material.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

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

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN

Before: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Respondent: Dr. S. Pandian, CIT-DR
Hearing: 19.08.2024Pronounced: 23.10.2024

O R D E R Per Bench These assessee’s six appeals to 82/Coch/2021, for assessment years 2006-07 to 2011-12, arise against the CIT(A)-3, Kochi’s common orders dated 11.02.2020; in appeal no.ITA.75 to 81/TVM/CIT(A)-III/2014-15, in proceedings u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act); respectively.

Cases called twice. None appears at assessee’s behest. We accordingly proceed exparte against the assessee.

2.

We find at the outset with the able assistance coming from the Revenue side represented by the learned CIT-DR that all these impugned assessment years, from 2006-07 to 2011-12 involve “unabated” assessments going by the relevant date of to 82/Coch/2021 A. Kamaludden Thangal sec.153C notices issued on 29.10.2013, in light of sec.153(1) 1st proviso. It is in this backdrop that the learned CIT-DR could hardly rebut the clinching fact that once no assessment(s) pertaining to all these assessment years could be stated to be pending as on the date of “reference”, only an addition based on seized material(s) could be made in assessee’s hands going by PCIT vs. Abhisar Buildwell (P) Ltd., [2023] 454 ITR 212 (SC). We find that there is no such addition(s) made in all these assessment years in light of the preceding legal position. We thus go by their lordships’ preceding landmark decision to accept the assessee’s first and foremost legal ground in these six appeals to 82/Coch/2021 and quash the instant six assessments in very terms. Ordered accordingly.

3.

Delay of 440, 444, 444, 444, 445 and 440 days assessment year-wise, respectively; in filing these appeals is condoned going by the assessee’s averments in its condonation petitions and the fact that hon'ble apex court’s directions in [2022] 441 ITR 722 (SC) have already excluded time period from 15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022 for all intents and purposes on account of Covid-19 pandemic outbreak.

4.

To sum up, these assessee’s six appeals to 82/Coch/2021 are allowed in above terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files.

More judgments on Section 153C

All 9,619 judgments and leading authorities on Section 153C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →