DCIT vs M/s Okaya Power Pvt. Ltd.

“8 . I have exami ned the s ubmissions of the appellant , the facts emanati ng fr om recor d as well as t he Co urt judgements i n t he matter relied upon by t he a ppellant. The appellant is stated to be a priv ate company engaged in the busi ness of manufacturi ng of inverters, aut omotiv e, e-ricksha ws, UPS and solar appl icatio ns as well as po wer b ups. It is seen from the ass essme nt order that pursuant to a s earc h and s eizur e operation carri ed out on the Alankit group [stated t o be a congl omer ate of several group co mpani es wit h diversified activities], Shri Alok Kumar Agar wal, his s on Shri Ankit Agarwal and cl ose ass ociates on 18.10.2019, certain incrimi nating evidenc es pertai ni ng to the appellant w ere found and seized, in whose case proceedi ngs u/s 153C of the Act wer e therefore com menced. In view of the af ores aid, notice u/s 153C of t he Act was issued on 06.04.2022 to the appellant and assessme nt order was subsequently p assed on 25.03.2023 determi ni ng the income of the appel lant for the year at Rs. 3 ,69,98,626/. Against t hi s impugned assessment orde r passed u/s 153C of t he Act on 25.03.2023, t he appellant filed appeal on 21.04.2023 raising 10 (ten) grounds of appeal with vari ous sub-part s and 2 (two) additio nal grounds of appeal (supra), i nvoki ng bot h l egal issues as well as issues on the merits of the additions made and so me general grounds . It would be i n t he fitness of thi ngs to exami ne the l egal issues raised by the appellant at t he outset as they go to the root of the mat ter.

9.

As menti oned above, f rom a per usal of the grounds of appeal and submissions filed by the appellant, i t is seen t hat t he appellant has di sput ed the merits of the additi ons made i n t he assessment order and al so challenged the or der by rai sing vario us l e gal grounds. In ground no. 3 of appeal and the writt en submissi on/s filed, the appellant has raised a le gal ground cont ending tha t proceedi ngs initiated u/s 153C of t he Act i n its case for the i nstant assessment year , i.e. AY 2012-13, are barr ed by limi tati on, si nc e the i ns tant ass essme nt year fall s beyond t he period of 10 yea rs from the date of searc h, i nterpret ed i n t his case as the dat e of ta ki ng possession of the seiz ed documents or asse ts by the AO of t he appellant or non-searched person or date of handing over of seized documents by A O of searched person t o AO of the appellant/date of iss ue of notice u/s 153C of the Ac t. Apr opos t he aforesaid ground, t he appellant has submitted t hat i n its cas e, proceedings u/s 153C of the Ac t for t he AYs 2010-11 to 2020-21 were initiated by the AO on t he basi s of search and seizure action u/s 132(1 ) of the Act co nduct ed on 18.10.2019 on the Al ankit group. The appellant has submitted that proc eedi ngs i nitiated f or the i nst ant assessment year, i.e. AY 2011-12 are barr ed by limitation, si nc e the instant assessm ent year falls beyo nd the perio d of 10 ye ars , and he nce is outside the scope of releva nt assessment year as defi ned in Explanati on 1 t o s ection 153A of t he Act. In s upport of the aforesaid submissions, the a ppellant has plac ed reliance on the provisions of section 153C r.w.s. 153A of t he Act as well as t he followi ng judicial pronouncement:

‘153A.[(1 )] Not withstandi ng anything c ontai ned in section 139, sec ti on 147, secti on 148, s ection 1 49, section 151 and secti on 153, i n the case of a person1-0-where a search is i nitiate d under sectio n 132 or books of acco unt, other doc uments or a ny assets are requisiti oned under section 132A after t he 31st day of May, 2003 — [but on or before the 31st day of March, 2021], t he Assessi ng Officer shall—

a. issue notice to such person requiring him to furnish within such period, as may be specified in the notice, the return of inco me in respect o f each assessment year falling wi thin six assessment years [and for the relevant assessment year or years] referred to in clause (b), in the prescribed form and verified in the prescribed manner and setting forth such other particulars as may be prescribed and the provisions of this Act shall, so far as may be, apply accordingly as if such return were a return required to be furnished under section 139;

b. assess or r eassess t he total income of six assessment ye ars immediately prec edi ng t he assessment year rel evant to t he previous year i n whic h such searc h is c onducted or r equisition is made12 [and for the rele vant assessment year or ye ars ].

Pro vided t hat the Assessi ng Officer shall assess or reass ess t he tot al i ncome i n res pect of each ass essment ye ar falling withi n such six assessment years [and for t he rel evant assessment year or years]:

Pro vided further t hat ass essment or r eass essment, if any , relating to any assessment year falli ng withi n t he perio d of six ass essment ye ars [and for the r elevant assessment year or years] refer red to i n this [sub-section] pendi ng on the date of initi atio n of the searc h under sectio n 132 or maki ng of requisition under section 132A, as t he c as e may be, shall abate :

[Pro vided also that the Ce ntral G overnment may by rul es made by it and published i n the Official Gaze tte (e xcept in case s whe re any ass essment or reassessment has aba ted under t he sec ond proviso ] specify t he class or classes of c as es in whic h the Assessing Officer shall not be requir ed t o issue notice for ass essing or reassessi ng the total i ncome for six assessme nt years im mediat ely precedi ng the ass ess ment ye ar releva nt to the previ ous ye ar i n which s ear ch is c onduct ed or requisi ti on is made [and for t he relevant assessm ent year or years]:]

[Pro vided also t hat no notice for assessment or reass essme nt shall be issue d by the Ass essi ng Officer for the relevant assessment year or years unl ess—

(a)

the Assessing Officer has in his possession books of account or other documents or evidence which reveal that the income, represented i n the form of asset, w hich has escaped assessment amounts to or is likely to amount to fifty lakh rupees or more in the relevant assessment year or in aggregate in the relevant assessment years.

(b)

the i nco me referr ed to i n cla use (a) or part thereof has escaped assessment for such year or years; and

(c)

the s earch under section 132 is i nitiated or requisitio n under sectio n 132A is made on or after the 1st day of April, 2017.

Explanati on 1. —For the purposes of t hi s sub-secti on, t he expr ession "r el evant assessment year " s hall mean an assessment year prec edi ng t he asse ssment year rel eva nt to the previous year i n which s earch is c onducted or requisitio n is made whic h falls beyond si x ass essment ye ars but not later than te n assessment year s fr om t he end of the assess ment year r elevant to t he pr evious ye ar in which search is concluded or requisition is made.

Explanati on 2. – F or the purp oses of the fourth proviso, “asset” shal l incl ude immovabl e pr operty bei ng land or bui lding or bot h, s hares a nd securities; loans and adv ances, deposits in bank account.]... ...’

9.3

The pr ovisions of the s ecti on are further explained stati ng t hat the AO shall assess or reassess the total income of six assessment years i mmediately prec eding the assessment year relevant to the previ ous year i n whic h such s earch is conducted ‘and the rel eva nt assessment year. ’ The provisions o f the above secti on are to b e read i n tandem wi th sectio n 153C of t he Ac t i n res pect of assess ment i n the case of a non-searched person.

10.

Before movi ng on t o the rec ent judgement of t he Ho n’bl e D el hi Hi gh Court deliver ed i n the case of Ojjus Medicare on the subject-matter at hand, it woul d be perti nent t o refer to the positi on of law as laid down by the earlier decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Cour t i n t he case of CIT v. Jasjit Singh [2023] 458 ITR 437 (S C ) and the Ho n’ble D el hi High C ourt i n the c ase of CIT v. RRJ Securities Ltd [2016] 380 ITR 612 (Del hi ) with regard to the date of recko ni ng for calc ulating the ass essment ye ars for reop ening i n the case of a non-se arc hed person/t hird party, wherei n it was observed that as against t he date o f s earc h, the date o n which the AO of the person other than the one searc hed ass umes t he possession of the s eized ass ets would be t he r eleva nt dat e for applyi ng the provisions of Secti on 153A of t he Act. The relevant extracts of the decisions of the H on’ ble Supreme C ourt and the Ho n’ble jurisdictional Hi gh Co urt are reproduced below:

In Jasjit Si ngh (supr a), the Hon’bl e Supreme Co urt observed as under:

‘9. It is evident on a plain i nterpr etati on of S ecti on 15 3C(1 ) that the Parliamentar y i ntent to enac t the proviso was t o c ater not me rely to t he que stion of abatement but also with regard to the date from whic h t he six year perio d was t o be r eckoned, in respect of whic h the ret urns wer e t o be filed by the third party (whos e premises are not searched a nd i n respe ct of whom the specific pr ovision unde r Section 153-C was enac ted). The revenue argued t hat t he proviso (t o S ection 153(c)(1)] is confined in its applica tion to the question of a batem ent.

10.

This Court is of the opinio n that the revenue’s argument is i nsubsta ntial and wit hout merit. It i s quite plausible tha t without t he ki nd of int erpretation which SSP Aviati on ad opted, the A.O. seized of the materi als -of the sea rch party, under Se ction 132 would take his own tim e to forward the papers and mate rials belongi ng to the thi rd par ty, to the conc erned A.O. In that ev ent if the date would virtually "rel ate back" as is sought t o be contended by t he revenue, (to the dal e of t he seizure), the prej udice ca used to the third par ty , who wo ul d be drawn i nt o proceedi ngs as it were unwit ti ngly (and in many cases have no co ncern with it at all), is di s-prop orti onate. For i nstance, if the papers are i n fact assigned under Secti on 153-C af ter a period o f four ye ars , the third party as sessee’s prej udice is wr it large as it woul d have t o virtually pres erve the r ecords for at latest 10 years which is no t t he re quirement i n law. Such disastr ous and harsh consequenc es cannot be attributed to Parliament. O n the other hand, a plain readi ng of Secti on 153-C s upports the i nte rpretation which this Court adopts...’

‘24. As discussed he reinbefore, i n t erms of pr oviso to Secti on 153C of t he Act, a refer ence t o the date of t he searc h under the second provis o to Secti on 153A of t he Act has to be construed as the dat e of handing over of assets /doc uments belongi ng to the Ass essee (bei ng t he person other than the one searched) to the AO having jurisdictio n to assess the said Assesse e. Furt her proc eedi ngs, by virtue of Secti on 153C(1) of the Act, woul d have to be in acc or dance wit h secti on 153A of t he Act and the refer ence t o t he d ate of searc h woul d ha ve to be cons tr ued as t he reference to the date of recordi ng of satisfacti on. It wo uld follow t hat the six ass essment ye ars for whic h as sessments/reassess ments could be made under Secti on 153C of the Act would also hav e to be construed wit h referenc e to t he date o f handi ng over of ass ets /doc uments to the AO of t he Assessee. In this case, it wo uld be the date of t he recor di ng of satisf action under Sectio n 153C of the Act, i.e., 8th Sept ember , 2010. In this vi ew, t he ass essm ents made i n r espe ct of assessment years 2003-04 and 2004-05 woul d be beyond the period of six assessment years as rec koned wi th ref erence t o the date of rec ording of satisfacti on by t he AO of the searched person. It i s c ontended b y t he Revenue tha t the rel evant si x asses sment y ears would be the assessment years pri or to t he ass essme nt year rel evant t o the previous ye ar i n whic h the search was conduc ted. If thi s i nt erpret ation as ca nvassed by the Revenue is accepted, it woul d mean that whereas i n case of a person searched, assessments in r elation to six previ ous years pr ecedi ng t he year in which the search lakes place can be reopened but i n cas e of any ot her person, who is not s earched but his ass ets are s eized from the searc hed person, the period for whic h t he assessments coul d be reopened wo uld be much beyond the peri od of si x years. This i s so because the date of handing over of assets/docume nts of a person, ot her tha n t he searched perso n, to the AO woul d be subsequent to the dat e of t he search. This, i n our vie w, woul d be cont rary to the scheme o f Section 153C (1) of the Act, whi ch c onstrues t he date of receipt of ass ets and doc uments by the AO of t he Ass es see (other than one searc hed) as the date of the s earch on the Ass esse e, The rati onale appears to be that whereas i n the cas e of a searc hed person t he AO of the s earched perso n assumes possession of seized ass ets/documents on search of the Assessee; the sei zed ass ets/documents belongi ng to a person other t han a s earched person co me into possession of the AO of that pe rso n only after the A O of the searched pers on i s satisfi ed that t he assets /doc uments do not belong to the s earc hed pe rson. Thus, the date on which t he A O of t he pers on o ther t han the one s earc hed ass umes the possession of t he s ei zed assets woul d be the relevant date for applying the provisions of S ec tion 153A of the Act. We, therefore, accept the c ont ention tha t i n any view of the matter , assessment f or AY 2003-04 and A Y 2004-05 were outside the scope of Secti on 153C of the Ac t and the A O had no Jurisdiction t o ma ke an ass essment of t he Assess ee's income for t hat year.’ {Emphasis s upplied}

F. IDENTIFICAT ION OF THE CO MMENCEMEN T PO INT FOR THE PURPOSES OF COMPUTA TION OF THE SIX AN D T EN

YEAR BLOCK

75.

The First Proviso to s ecti on 153C si gnificantly shifts the refere nce poi nt which is spo ken o f in section 153A(1 ) whil e defining the poi nt fr om whi c h t he peri od of six AYs' is to be calc ulated, and whic h stipul ates it to be t he date of search or requis ition, t o t he date of rec eipt of bo oks of acco unt, documents or ass ets seiz ed or requi sitioned by the Jurisdicti onal AO of the non-s earched person. The Pro viso, thus by virtue of a dee mi ng legal fic ti on, shifts the commencement poi nt from the date o f i nitiation of searc h or maki ng of r equisiti on to the date of r eceipt of books, documents o r by the j urisdictional AO of the non-searc hed person. The s hift of the rel evant date i n the case of a non-s earched pers on thus bei ng governed and regulated by the First P roviso of s ecti on 153C(1) is, howev er, an i ssue which is no l onge r res Inte gra

... ... ... ...

80.

The afo resaid discussion thus re nders a det ermi native qui etus to the identification of t he s tarti ng post from which t he bl ock of si x AYs' or the "relevant assessment year" would have to be calculat ed. The contention of the respondents that t he s aid bl ock peri ods woul d have to be reckoned with ref erenc e t o the date of searc h thus can neither be countena nce d nor possi bly accepted. T hat submission i s cl ea rly addressed contrary to a l ong and consistent line o f p recedents which have held t o the c ontr ary and whic h unequi vocally accepted the point of c ommenc ement for the purposes of identifying the six or the "r el evant assessment ye ar" to be etched from the date of handover of documents, assets or things to the AO of the non-searc hed part y. ... ..

84.

As would be evi dent from the abo ve, alt hough t he decisi ons i n Sarwar A gency and RR J S ecurities we re cited, t he le arne d Judge chose to obs erve that t he section 153C(1 ) Pr oviso would only be liable to be construed as rel eva nt for t he purposes of abateme nt. We find ours elves unable t o s ust ai n that line of reasoni ng since both Sarwar Agency as well as RRJ S ec urities have struck a line which is in c onsonance with the vi ew ta ken in SS P Aviation and whic h has si nce co me to be af firmed by the S upreme Court in Jasjit Singh. In any case, the law as enunciated i n RKM Powerge n woul d not sustain beari ng i n mi nd the express enunciatio n of the legal position by the Supreme C ourt as is manifest from a readi ng of paragraph 9 of Jasjit Singh.

i.

Dat e of s ea rc h an d s eiz u r e o p er at io n : 18 .1 0 .20 1 9

ii.

Da t e of is s u e o f no t ic e u/s 15 3 C : 22 .0 3 .20 2 2

iii . Ass es s m ent y ea r s f o r w h ic h n ot ic e u /s 153 C w as is s ued : 2 01 0 -1 1 t o 2 02 0 -2 1

iv . D at e o f pa s s ing o f t h e as s es sm ent o r d er : 25 .0 3 .20 2 3

G. COMPU TA TION OF THE SIX A ND TEN YEAR BLOCK IN THE PR ES ENT BATCH OF WR IT PETITIONS

86.

In the pres ent batch, List I pertai ns t o writ petitions which have Sati sfacti on Notes rec orded or section 153C no tices issue d between t he peri od 01 April 2021 to 31 Marc h 2022. Undisputedly, the Firs t Proviso to s ection I53C, and whi ch has been co nsistently rec ognized to also embody the commencement point for rec ko ni ng the six or t he ten A Ys ', shifts t he r elevant date from the date of initiation of searc h or a requisiti on m ade to t he date of rec eipt of books of account or doc uments and assets s eized by the jurisdicti onal AO of t he non-searc hed pe rso n. Cons equently, t he block of si x or ten A Ys' would have to be r eck oned beari ng the afores aid dat e in mi nd. Alt hough i n the present batch of writ petitions, the dale of actual handing ov er ha s not been explicitly menti oned i n a maj ori ty of the writ pe titions, l earned counsels for respective sides had addressed s ubmissions bas ed on t he assumption t hat it would be the date of issua nce of the Satisfactio n Note by the AO of the non-searc hed person and i n the case of non-availabi lity of such a note, the date of issuanc e of the section 153C notices whic h would be perti ne nt for the purpos es of the First Proviso to section 153C.

87.

Assumi ng, therefore, that the handover of material gat hered i n the course of the search and pertai ni ng t o the non-s earched pers on occur red between 01 A pril 2 021 to 31 March 2022, the same woul d essentially constitute FY 2021-22 as being the previous year of searc h for t he pur poses of the no n-sea rched enti ty. As a nec essary coroll ary, t he relevant AY woul d become AY 2022-23. AY 2022-23 would thus co nstitute t he starti ng poi nt for the pur poses of identifyi ng the si x years which are spoken of in secti on 153C. T he six A Ys' are envisaged t o be thos e whic h immediat el y prec ede the A Y so identi fied with ref erence to the previ ous year of sea rch. It would thus lead us to co ncl ude tha t it woul d be t he six AYs ' immediately precedi ng A Y 2022-23 which co uld have formed the basis for i ni tiati on of action under s ection 153C. Consequently, and recko ned backward, the six rel evant A Ys' woul d be: -

Comput ation of the six-y ear bl ock perio d as provided under sec tion 153C of the Act	No. of years
AY 2021-22	1
AY 2020-21	2
AY 2019-20	3
AY 2018-19	4
AY 2017-18	5
AY 2016-17	6

Consequently , A Y 2021-22 would become the first of the six prec edi ng A Ys' and would as per the t able s et o ut herei nabove terminat e a t A Y 2016-17.

88.

Section 153A replicat es the ba sis on which t he six AYs ’ are to be identified and c omputed wi th the s olitary distinc ti on bei ng t hat in the case of the se arc hed person, the six AYs' are l iable to be computed from the AY pertai ning to t he FY i n whi ch the s earch was conducted. The starting poi nt for the pur pose s of identifying the six AYs ' i n the case of secti on 153A would thus turn upon t he ye ar of s earch as oppose d to the handover of mate rial whic h is s poken of i n the Fi rst Proviso t o section 153C. If one were to therefore assume that a sear ch took plac e on a person between 1^{s t} April 2021 to 31^{s t} March 2022, t he perti nent A Y would become A y 2022-23 a nd the correspondi ng six AYs ' woul d be as follows:

Comput ation of t he six-year block period as provided under section 153C of the Act	No.
AY 2021-22	of1
AY2020-21	2
AY2019-20	3
AY2018-19	4
AY 2017-18	5
AY2016-17	6

89.

That ta kes us the n to the iss ue of identifyi ng t he "r elevant assess ment year" fo r t he purpos es of computi ng the ten year bl ock. Explanati on 1 to s ection 153A specifi es the manner i n whi c h the entire ten AY perio d is t o be c omputed. While the c omputation of six AYs ' foll ows the position as enunc iated and identi fied above, Explanati on 1 presc ribes t hat the t en AYs ' would hav e to be computed f rom t he end of the A Y rel evant to the FY i n which the searc h was conduc ted or r equisition made. T he te n A Y peri od c onsequently is to be reckoned from t he end of the AY pertai ni ng t o t he pre vious yea r i n whic h the search was conducted as disti nct from the precedi ng year which is s poke n of in the cas e of the six rel evant A Ys'.

90.

Viewed i n t hat li ght, and whil e kee ping t he period of 01 April 2021 to 31 March 2022 as the c onstant, t he rel evant A Y would be AY 2022-23. The ten A Ys ' wo uld hav e t o be computed from 31 March 2023 with the said dat e i ndubitably c onstituting t he end of the AY rel eva nt to the previ ous year of s earc h. Viewed in li ght of t he above, the bl ock peri od of 10 AYs' would be as follows : -

Computation of the ten-y ear block peri od as provid ed under section 153C read with secti on 153A of t he Act	N o. of ye ars
AY 2022-23	1
AY 2021-22	2
AY 2020-21	3
AY 2019-20	4
AY 2018-19	5
AY 2017-18	6
AY 2016-17	7
AY 2015-16	8
AY 2014-15	9
AY 2013-14	10

... ....

94.

Similarly, and i n light o f what has been held by us herei nabove, the relevant bl oc k of ten A Ys' when computed for the period 01 April 2022 - 31 March 2023, and wher e the Sat isfacti on Note was drawn by t he A O o f the non-searc hed person between those two dates , woul d be as under : -

Computation of the t en-year block perio d as provided unde r s ection 153C read with s ec tion 153A of the Act	N o. of years
AY2023-24	1
AY 2022-23	2
AY 2021-22	3
AY 2020-21	4
AY 2019-20	5
AY 2018-19	6
AY 2017-18	7
AY 2016-17	8
AY 2015-16	9
AY 2014-15	10

...... .

96.

To recall, the peti tions formi ng part of Lis t I pert ai n to A Ys 2010-11, 2011-12 a nd 2012-13. So far as the af oreno ted wri t petiti ons ar e c onc erned, undisput edly AY 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13 fall beyond t he maxim um perio d of t en AYs'. Si nce the t en AYs', when c omputed from the e nd of AY 2022¬23 woul d t er mi nat e upon AY 2013-14, A Ys' 2 010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13 would clearly fall outside t he block peri od of t en AYs’ and c annot legal ly or justifiably be r eopene d under section 153C read with section I53A of t he Act.

97.

Proceedi ng the n to List II, we fi nd that the petiti ons placed i n that list per tai n to cases where the hand ove r occurred i n FYs 2 022-23 and 2023-24. Cons equently, the rel evant AYs ’ wo uld be A Y2023- 24 and AY 2024-25 res pectivel y. In light of the pri nciples enunciated by us and which explai n ho w the period o f six and ten A Ys' is liable t o be computed, the reopeni ng of assessm ents pertai ning to AYs ’ 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 and 2 013-14 would clearly fall beyond the ambit of ten AYs’ as provided under S ection I53C read with S ec tio n 153A. We not e i n this behalf that all of the writ petiti ons for ming part of List II pertai n to t he afor enot ed A Ys' 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 and 2013-14... {Emphasis supplied}

12.

Fr om the afor esaid judgment of the Hon’ble jurisdictio nal Hi gh Court, it woul d be s een that the Ho n’bl e Hi gh Court has held that t he bl oc k of six AYs ' woul d have t o be identifi ed beari ng i n mi nd the AY pertai ning to t he FY i n which t he search had be en conduc ted or requisiti on made; ho wever, the ten AYs' ar e to be comput ed or reckoned from the end of the AY rel evant to the year of searc h. Accordi ngly, it has be en held t hat i f the S atisfac tion No tes have be en r ecorded o r Secti on 153C notices have been i ssued betwe en the perio d 01 April 2021 to 31 March 2022, then the relevant AY would be AY 2022-23 and ac cordi ngly AY 2022-23 woul d f orm the fi rst year of t he bloc k of t en AYs' and the perio d of ten A Ys ' woul d termi nate in AY 2013-14, and accordi ngl y notic es issued for ass es sme nt years prior t o AY 2013-14 wo ul d fall beyond the ambit of t en A Ys' as provided under sectio n 153C read wi th secti on 153A.

12.1

It is s een that facts of the present cas e ar e similar to the facts of t he a for esaid case i n Opus Medicare (P. ) Ltd (supra), whi ch for the sake of conv eni enc e ar e tabul ated here under :

S . N o .	P a r t i c u l a r s	F a c t s o f O j j u s M e d i c a r e ( P . ) L t d	F a c t s o f t h e c a s e o f t h e a p p e l l a n t
a .	D a t e o f s e a r c h a n d s e i z u r e o p e r a t i o n	1 8 . 1 0 . 2 0 1 9	1 8 . 1 0 . 2 0 1 9
b .	P e r s o n o n w h o m s e a r c h w a s c o n d u c t e d	A l a n k i t G r o u p o f C o m p a n i e s / e n t i t i e s	A l a n k i t G r o u p o f C o m p a n i e s / e n t i t e s
c .	D a t e o f i s s u e o f n o t i c e u / s 1 5 3 C	2 2 . 0 3 . 2 0 2 2	0 6 . 0 4 . 2 0 2 2
d .	A s s e s s m e n t y e a r s f o r w h i c h p r o c e e d i n g s u / s 1 5 3 C w e r e i n i t i a t e d	2 0 1 0 - 1 1 t o 2 0 2 0 - 2 1	2 0 1 0 - 1 1 t o 2 0 2 0 - 2 1
e .	D a t e o f p a s s i n g o f t h e a s s e s s m e n t o r d e r	2 5 . 0 3 . 2 0 2 3	2 5 . 0 3 . 2 0 2 3

12.2

In this r egard , infor matio n regardi ng rel ev ant date/sIn t his regard , information rega rdi ng r el evant da te/sIn thi s r egard, information regardi ng r el evant dat e/s o fof recordi ngrecordingrec ording of satisfactionsati sfac tionsatisfac ti on no te/snot e/s and handi ng over of seized documents /mate rialdocuments/materialdoc uments/mat erial to thet he AOA O of the appellant,appella nt, as providedprovi ded by t hethe appellant,appella nt, ar eare s ee ns eenseen fromfro mfr om t hethe c opycopy of satisfacti on not enote o fof the j urisdicjurisdictional AO r ecordedrecorded ono n -06.04.2022, m entioni ngmentioni ng t hethe datedat eda te o fof handi ng over of docum entsdoc uments t oto the AO of t hethe appellantapp ellant as 16.02.2022, as reproduc ed below:re produc ed below: -

To s ummarize, t he r elevant dates in t he i nsta ntTo summ arize , the rel evant dates in t he i nstant case as submit ted by the appellant and s een from record are:submitt ed by the appellant and s een from record ar e:submitted by the appellant and seen fro m record a re: - Date of recording of Satisfaction note by the AO o f the searched person -16.02.2022 [pertaining[pertaini ng to AY 2022-23] - Date of receipt of seized material by the AO AO of the non-searched person /appellant -06 .04.202 24.2022 [pertaining to AY 2023-24] - Date of issue of noticeno tice u/s 15 3C53C of the Act -06.04.2022 [pertaining to AY 2023-24]

12.3

It is t husthus se ens een t hatthat the fac ts of t hethe presentpr ese ntpres ent c as ecase arear e similar to the facts considere dconsider edconsidered in t hethe c asecase of Ojj usOjjus Medicare (P.) L td Ltd (S upr a)(Supra)(S upra) [which[whi ch also re fersrefers t orefer s to the same sa me SearchSearc h anda nd seizures eizures eizur e operationoper ation on the Alanki tAla nki t group ].group].gr oup]. In t hethe i nst anti nstant cas ecase of the appellantappella nt under consideration,consider ation, whil ewhile notice u/s 153C of the ActAc t was iss uedissued to thet he appellant on 06.0 4.2022, i.e. i n thet he FY 2022-23 r elevantrelevant to thet he A Y 2023-24, however, t hethe seized doc uments/materi aldocum ents/materi al were received by t hethe AO of thet he appellant in the precedi ng fi na ncialprecedi ng fi nancial year, on 16.02.2022, i.e. i n thet he FY 2021-22 rele vant to the AY 2022-23. The Hon’ble CourtC ourt i n para 86 of t hethe judgmentj udgment i n t hethe casecas e of Ojj us Medicare (s upra) has obser ved thatOjjus Medicare (supra ) has observed that –

... U ndisputedly, the First Pr oviso to section 153C, and... Undisputedly, the First Pr oviso t o s ec tion 153C, and... Undisputedly, t he First Pr oviso t o section 153C, and whichwhic h has been consistentlyconsi stentl r ecogni zedrecognized to also em body the c ommencem ent point for reck oni ng the si xembody the commenceme nt p oint for reckoni ng the si xemb ody the commence ment point for rec koni ng the si x or t he t en A Ys', s hif ts the relevant dat e frYs', shifts t he r elevant date from the dat eom the date o fof i niti ati on of s earchse arc h or a requisition made to the datedat e of rec eiptr eceipt o fof books of accountacc ount or docume ntsdocumentsand assets s eiz eds eized by t hethe jurisdictio nalj urisdicti o nal AO of t hethe non -searc hed pers on. Conseque ntly, the bloc k of si x or t en AYs ' wo uld have t o be reckoned beari ng t he af ores aid dat e i n mi nd.... As menti oned earlier , t he date of r ecei pt of s eized doc uments/ass ets by the AO of the appella nt is available in the i ns tant case and mentioned as 16.02.2022. Accordi ngly, o n the aforesaid fac ts i n the i nstant case of the appellant, followi ng the judge ment of the H on’ble jurisdictio nal Hi gh Court, it is held that the peri od of t en AYs ’ woul d commence bei ng counted w. e.f. the A Y 2022-23, whic h, b y bac kward c ounti ng, would ter mi nate i n AY 2013-14. Accordingly, r espectf ully foll owi ng the aforesaid judgment of the jurisdictional High Court i n the case of Ojjus Medicare (P.) Ltd (s upra), it is held that notice issued on 06.04.2022 for instant assessment year, AY 2012-13, would fall beyond the ambit of t en AYs' as provided under section 153C re ad with secti on 153A, and henc e the impugned assessment order dat ed 25.03.2 023 pass ed u/s 153C of the Act for the i nstant AY 2012-13 in purs uance of such notice would not s urvi ve, havi ng no legs to stand, and is thus annull ed, b ei ng beyond t he perio d of 10 years .

12.4

As it is held that the Assessi ng Officer did not ha ve the j uri sdi cti on to ass ess the appellant ’s case for the A.Y 2012-13, the refore, all the other gro unds rai sed by the appellant are re ndered academi c i n nature, and henc e not required to be adjudicat ed upo n. Ther e is hence no adj udication on merits i n t hi s case.

13.

In t he result t he appeal filed by the appellant is allowed.”