| |
| The Tax Publishers2020 TaxPub(DT) 4762 (Bang-Trib) INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 137 Section 153A Section 153C
Where assessee and his brother were partner in 'HMC' and on seizure of document on search marked to identitfy documents as M.J. and 'HM', hence merely because the seized record had been numbered as does not necessarily mean that the same was seized from a different person though the assessee had raised this legal plea, no document was produced to substantiate this claim to show that proceeding under section 154C would be initiated, instead of section 153A.
|
Search and seizure - Assessment under section 153A - Proceedings under section 153A or 153C -
H.J. Siwani and M.J. Siwani were brothers. They were partners of a firm named M/s. H.M. Constructions, which was engaged in the business of construction of residential and commercial complexes. The revenue carried out search and seizure operations under section 132 in the group of companies of M/s. HM Constructions on 30-6-2011. Assessees had raised certain legal issues challenging the validity of search action. With regard to the validity of search proceedings, the CIT(A) had held that he does not have jurisdiction to examine the said issue. Accordingly, he had rejected the grounds raised before in this regard. Held: From the assessment orders, it was noticed that revenue has carried out search and seizure operations in the hands of M/s. HM Constructions and in the hands of the assessees herein. both the assessees herein were partners of M/s. H M Constructions. It was also not shown to this Tribunal that the assessees herein have different business premises distinct and separate from the premises of M/s. HM Constructions. Hence, it cannot be conclusively said that the incriminating documents were seized from a person, other than the assessees herein. The details of seized record were given in the table available in assessment order. A perusal of the same would show that one seized record is numbered as A-1/HM/1 and the remaining records were numbered as M.J. Shivani/Scanned files 1/Doc. It was a known fact that the numbering of seized documents was done by search officials in order to identify the seized materials. Merely because the seized record had been numbered as 'HM' does not necessarily mean that the same was seized from a different person. Though the assessee had raised this legal plea, no document was produced to substantiate this claim.
REFERRED : IBC Knowledge Parl 92016) 385 ITR 346 (Karn) : 2016 TaxPub(DT) 2423 (Karn-HC) and Canara Housing Development Co. 92015) 62 Taxmann.com 250 (Karn) : 2015 TaxPub(DT) 4369 (Karn-HC).
FAVOUR : Against the assessee.
A.Y. : 2006-07, 2008-09 to 2013-14
INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 153A
 SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT
|