M/S. MAYUR ELECTRICAL INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,UTTAR PRADESH vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1957/DEL/2012Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 March 2016AY 2005-063 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal admitted the additional ground of appeal as it was a legal ground concerning jurisdiction and did not require fresh factual investigation. The appeals were set aside to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed appeals against the CIT(A) orders for AY 2004-05 and 2005-06. The assessee sought to raise an additional ground of appeal regarding the validity of the notice issued under Section 153A.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the notice issued under Section 153A was valid in the absence of a search and seizure operation under Section 132.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 153A,Section 132

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)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, DELHI BENCH ‘E’, NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI J. SUDHAKAR REDDY & MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE&

ORDER PER J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Both these appeals are filed by the assessee and are directed against the order of the Ld.CIT(A)-XXXII, Delhi dated 8.2.2012 pertaining to the Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2004-05 and dated 22.3.2012 pertaining to the A.Y. 2005-06. The assessee filed an application for admission of an additional ground of appeal

2. The Ld.Counsel for the assessee submitted that there was no search and seizure conducted u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act 1961 (the Act) in the case of the assessee and that neither a warrant was issued nor a panchanama drawn. Thus he argued that issual of notice u/s 153A of the Act framing of assessment u/s 153A r.w.s.153(3) of the Act was bad in law. and 1957/Del/12 A.Y. 2004-05 and 2005-06 Mayur Electrical Industries P.Ltd., Noida, UP 2.1. The Ld.Counsel further submitted that this is a legal ground requiring no fresh investigation into the facts and hence the ground should be admitted and adjudicated.

3.

The Ld.CIT,D.R. on the other hand submitted that this ground has been raised for the first time before the Tribunal and it requires verification of the facts.

4.

On a careful consideration of rival submissions we find that this ground is a legal ground on a jurisdictional issue and has to be admitted. No fresh investigation in facts is required to be done and hence we apply the proposition of law laid down in the judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of NTPC vs. CIT, 229 ITR 383(SC), and we admit this ground.

5.

As both parties submitted that the matter may be remanded to the file of the First Appellate Authority for considering this new ground, we set aside both the appeals of the assessee to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) for fresh adjudication in accordance with law.

6.

In the result both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 16th March, 2016.

More judgments on Section 153A

All 18,957 judgments and leading authorities on Section 153A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →