Commissioner Of Income Tax-Iii v. Sarvmangalam Builders & Developers Pvt.Ltd.

$~ *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

23.

+ * ITA 943/2015 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-III Appellant Through: Mr Kamal Sawhney, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr Raghvendra Singh, Junior Standing Counsel, Mr Sharad Agarwal and Mr Shikhar Garg, Advocates.

versus SARVMANGALAM BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.

Respondent WITH 24.

^4^ ITA 944/2015 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-III Appellant Through: Mr Kamal Sawhney, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr Raghvendra Singh, Junior Standing Counsel, Mr Sharad Agarwal and Mr Shikhar Garg, Advocates.

versus SARVMANGALAM BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.

Respondent AND 25.

+ ITA 945/2015 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-III Appellant Through: Mr Kamal Sawhney, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr Raghvendra Singh, Junior Standing Counsel, Mr Sharad Agarwal and Mr Shikhar Garg, Advocates.

ITA 943-45/2015 Page I of 3 By:AMULYA

versus SARVMANGALAM BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS PVT.LTD.

Respondent

CORAM:

JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

ORDER

% 11.12.2015 CM No.30416/2015 in ITA 943/2015 CM No.30419/2015 in ITA 945/2015

1. Allowed, subject to all just exception.

2. The applications stand disposed of.

CM No.30417/2015 in ITA 943/2015 CM No.30418/2015 in ITA 944/2015 CM No.30420/2015 in ITA 945/2015

3. For the reasons stated in the applications, the delay of 380 days in re filing the appeals is condoned.

4. The applications stand disposed of.

ITA Nos.943/2015. 944/2015 & ITA 945/2015

5. The Revenue has filed these appeals against the common order dated 14^*^ March, 2014 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (TTAT') in ITA Nos.196 to 198/Del/2011 for the Assessment Years ('AY') 2002-03 to 2004ITA 943-45/20] 5

05.

6. The short point arises for consideration whether the ITAT erred in holding that the proceedings under Section 153A of the Act initiated against the Assessee was bad in law since the premises which were searched under Section 132 were not of the Assessee.

7. The ITAT has noted as a matter of fact that the premises that was searched i.e. 3'"'^ Floor, Global Arcade, M. G. Road, Gurgaon was not of the Assessee. There was nothing on record to connect the Assessee with the premises searched. Therefore, qua the Assessee, the proceedings under Section 153 A was invalid. This being a factual aspect, no question of law arises.

8. The appeals are dismissed.

S.MURALIDHAR, J VIBHUBAKHRU, J DECEMBER 11, 2015 MK ITA 943-45/2015