Facts of the Case
Ashish Agrawal filed writ petitions before the
Delhi High Court challenging notices issued under Section 153C of the Income
Tax Act, 1961, pursuant to search and seizure operations conducted on another
person. The petitioner was treated as an “other person” for the purposes of
post-search assessment.
The challenge was based on the contention that no
incriminating material pertaining to the relevant assessment years was
discovered during the search, yet reassessment proceedings were initiated for
multiple preceding years. The petitions formed part of a large batch of
connected matters involving several assessees against whom similar notices had
been issued.
Issues
Involved
- Whether proceedings under Section 153C could be initiated against a
non-searched person without assessment-year-specific incriminating
material discovered during search.
- Whether reassessment of completed assessments for preceding years
was permissible in such circumstances.
- What constitutes valid jurisdictional satisfaction for invoking
Section 153C.
- The distinction between Sections 153A and 153C and their
applicability to searched and non-searched persons.
Petitioner’s Arguments
- The petitioner contended that the assumption of jurisdiction under
Section 153C was illegal in the absence of incriminating material relating
to the specific assessment years proposed to be reopened.
- It was argued that discovery of material pertaining to one year
cannot justify reassessment for other years without a direct nexus.
- The petitioner asserted that completed assessments can be reopened
only if material found during the search has a bearing on determination of
total income for those years.
- It was also contended that the statutory requirement of recording
proper satisfaction by the Assessing Officer had not been fulfilled.
Respondent’s Arguments (Revenue)
- The Revenue contended that the proceedings were validly initiated
pursuant to search operations and subsequent transfer of relevant
material.
- It was submitted that the Assessing Officer had recorded the
requisite satisfaction for invoking Section 153C.
- The Department argued that the material seized had a bearing on the
income of the petitioner and justified reassessment proceedings.
- It was further contended that the statutory scheme permits
assessment of multiple years once jurisdiction under Section 153C is
validly assumed.
Court Order / Findings
- Section 153C can be invoked only when seized material belonging to
or pertaining to the “other person” is found during the search.
- For completed assessments, reassessment must be based on
incriminating material having a bearing on the determination of income for
the specific assessment year.
- The existence of such material constitutes a foundational
jurisdictional requirement.
- The distinction between Sections 153A (searched person) and 153C
(other person) must be strictly maintained.
Important
Clarification
- Proceedings under Section 153C are not automatic merely because a
search has been conducted on another person.
- Jurisdiction over a non-searched person arises only where seized
material specifically relates to that person and the relevant assessment
years.
- Reassessment of completed assessments requires incriminating
material with a direct nexus to the determination of income for those
years.
- The judgment underscores the critical distinction between
assessment of searched persons (Section 153A) and other persons (Section
153C).
Link to download the order – https://www.mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1772271249_ASHISHAGRAWALVsASSISSTANTCOMMISSIONEROFINCOMETAXCENTALCIRCLE28DELHIANR..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