Facts of the Case
The writ petitions formed part of a batch challenging notices
issued under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to assessees who were not
subjected to the original search. The petitioners contended that no
incriminating material relating to the specific assessment years proposed to be
reopened had been discovered during the search of another person. In several
instances, the satisfaction notes either did not refer to the relevant
assessment years or were not furnished to the petitioners. Nevertheless, reassessment
proceedings were initiated for multiple years within the statutory block
period.
Issues Involved
- Whether
jurisdiction under Section 153C can be assumed against a non-searched
person without incriminating material relating to the specific assessment
year.
- Whether
material pertaining to one assessment year can justify reopening of all
preceding assessment years within the block period.
- Whether
absence or inadequacy of a satisfaction note vitiates the proceedings.
- Whether
completed assessments can be reopened without material having a bearing on
determination of income for that year.
Petitioner’s Arguments
The petitioners argued that initiation of proceedings under
Section 153C was without jurisdiction since no seized material pertaining to
the relevant assessment years existed. They contended that material relating to
a particular year cannot justify reassessment of unrelated years. For completed
assessments, reopening is permissible only where seized material specifically
relates to that year and impacts determination of total income. In certain
cases, satisfaction notes were either absent or did not establish any nexus
between the seized material and the assessment years concerned.
Respondent’s Arguments
The Revenue submitted that once incriminating material is
discovered during a search and is considered relevant to a non-searched person,
proceedings under Section 153C can be initiated for the prescribed block
period. It was argued that the statutory framework permits assessment of
multiple years and that the satisfaction recorded by the Assessing Officer was
sufficient to confer jurisdiction.
Court Order / FINDINGS
The Delhi High Court held that jurisdiction under Section 153C is contingent upon the existence of incriminating material belonging to or relating to the non-searched person and specifically connected to the assessment year sought to be reopened. Reassessment of completed assessments cannot be sustained unless the material discovered during the search has a direct bearing on the determination of total income for that particular year. The Court emphasized that discovery of material relating to one year does not justify reopening of other years within the block period. Consequently, proceedings initiated without year-specific incriminating material were held to be unsustainable in law.
Important Clarification
The Court clarified that the existence of incriminating
material is a jurisdictional precondition for invoking Section 153C against a
non-searched person. The Assessing Officer must demonstrate a clear nexus
between the seized material and the relevant assessment year. In the absence of
such material, reassessment proceedings for completed years cannot be lawfully
initiated merely because a search was conducted in the case of another person.
Link to download the order – https://www.mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1772191261_MAMTAAGARWALVsASSISTANTCOMMISSIONEROFINCOMETAXCENTRALCIRCLE28DELHIANR..pdf
Disclaimer
This content is shared strictly for general information and
knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information
from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or
advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability
arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the
assistance of AI tools.
0 Comments
Leave a Comment