Sachin A. Mehta v. DCIT - Taxpublishers.in

Case Laws Analysis
Relied Sanjay Gupta v. CIT 2014 TaxPub(DT) 3039 (Del-HC)
Applied National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT 1998 TaxPub(DT) 0342 (SC)

SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT


The Tax PublishersITA No. 1939 & 1940/Kol/2008 2015 TaxPub(DT) 4985 (Kol-Trib)div class=Section1> Sachin A. Mehta v. Dy. CIT INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 --Search and seizure--Jurisdiction of AO under section 153ARequisition under section 132A made prior to 31-5-2003--Search was conducted by Commissioner of Customs, on 16-9-2000 in the premises of assessee. There was a cash. Thereafter, the said authorities informed the IT Department. The IT Department issued search warrant on 28-2-2001 the Customs Authorities ultimately handed over the seized Material and a bank draft on 16-12-2004. Assessee contended that at that point of time action could have been taken only under Chapter XIVB of the I.T Act, for assessment in case of search or requisition after 31-5-2003, provision of section 153A would be applied. *Held:* A reading of sections 132A and 153A makes it clear that the section 153A postulates that when the assets are requisitioned under section 132A after 31-5-2003, the AO shall issue notice under section 153A. The IT Department had issued requisition under section 132A on 28-2-2001, which was communicated to the custom department on 5-3-2001. Since none of these events occurred after 31-05-2003 admittedly as per provisions of the IT Act, the assumption of jurisdiction under section 153A was not sustainable. Section 158BC or section 158BD under Chapter XIVB was applicable in this case. The AO could have only assumed jurisdiction under that Chapter XIVB. 158BC or 158BD since requisition under section 132A was made on 28-2-2001, admittedly, the provisions of section under Chapter XIVB were applicable. Hence, assumption of jurisdiction otherwise than by recourse to Chapter XIVB was not sustainable/applicable as per law. In the Act it has nowhere been provided that assumption of jurisdiction depends on supply of requisitioned materials. Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 153A Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 132A *Applied:*National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT 229 ITR 383. *Relied:*Sanjay Gupta v. CIT (2014) 366 ITR 18 (Del) and MDLR Resorts (P) Ltd under Writ Petition (Civil) Nos. 823 of 2013 & Ors. vide order dt. 20-12-2013. *REFERRED :* B.R Bamasi v. CIT (83 ITR 225, Jute Corporation of India Ltd v. CIT 187 ITR 688, CIT v. Mohd. Iqbal & Ors (1996) 221 ITR 481 (MP) and Gorakhpur Petro Oils Ltd v. CIT (2005) 95 TTJ 489 (All-Trib) TM). FAVOUR : In assessee's favour. A.Y. : 2001-02 & 2003-04 IN THE ITAT KOLKATA B BENCH SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT

The Tax PublishersITA No. 1939 & 1940/Kol/2008
2015 TaxPub(DT) 4985 (Kol-Trib)div class=Section1>

Sachin A. Mehta v. Dy. CIT

INCOME TAX ACT, 1961

--Search and seizure--Jurisdiction of AO under section 153ARequisition under section 132A made prior to 31-5-2003--Search was conducted by Commissioner of Customs, on 16-9-2000 in the premises of assessee. There was a cash. Thereafter, the said authorities informed the IT Department. The IT Department issued search warrant on 28-2-2001 the Customs Authorities ultimately handed over the seized Material and a bank draft on 16-12-2004. Assessee contended that at that point of time action could have been taken only under Chapter XIVB of the I.T Act, for assessment in case of search or requisition after 31-5-2003, provision of section 153A would be applied. Held: A reading of sections 132A and 153A makes it clear that the section 153A postulates that when the assets are requisitioned under section 132A after 31-5-2003, the AO shall issue notice under section 153A. The IT Department had issued requisition under section 132A on 28-2-2001, which was communicated to the custom department on 5-3-2001. Since none of these events occurred after 31-05-2003 admittedly as per provisions of the IT Act, the assumption of jurisdiction under section 153A was not sustainable. Section 158BC or section 158BD under Chapter XIVB was applicable in this case. The AO could have only assumed jurisdiction under that Chapter XIVB. 158BC or 158BD since requisition under section 132A was made on 28-2-2001, admittedly, the provisions of section under Chapter XIVB were applicable. Hence, assumption of jurisdiction otherwise than by recourse to Chapter XIVB was not sustainable/applicable as per law. In the Act it has nowhere been provided that assumption of jurisdiction depends on supply of requisitioned materials.

Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 153A

Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 132A

Applied:National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT 229 ITR 383. Relied:Sanjay Gupta v. CIT (2014) 366 ITR 18 (Del) and MDLR Resorts (P) Ltd under Writ Petition (Civil) Nos. 823 of 2013 & Ors. vide order dt. 20-12-2013.

REFERRED : B.R Bamasi v. CIT (83 ITR 225, Jute Corporation of India Ltd v. CIT 187 ITR 688, CIT v. Mohd. Iqbal & Ors (1996) 221 ITR 481 (MP) and Gorakhpur Petro Oils Ltd v. CIT (2005) 95 TTJ 489 (All-Trib) TM).

FAVOUR : In assessee's favour.

A.Y. : 2001-02 & 2003-04

IN THE ITAT KOLKATA B BENCH