SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(SC) 402

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
M.R. SHAH, SUDHANSHU DHULIA, JJ.
Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Central-3 - Appellant
Versus
Abhisar Buildwell P. Ltd. - Respondent
Civil Appeal No. 6580 of 2021 Connected Appeals filed by the Revenue Civil Appeal No. 4264 of 2018, Civil Appeal No. 2648 of 2020, Civil Appeal No. 6585 of 2021, Civil Appeal No. 3044 of 2023 (@ S.L.P.(Civil) No. 8453 of 2023 @ Diary No. 20983 of 2020), Civil Appeal No. 3045 of 2023 (@ S.L.P.(Civil) No. 8454 of 2023 @ Diary No. 22709 of 2020), Civil Appeal No. 6593 of 2021, Civil Appeal No. 3043 of 2023 (@ S.L.P.(Civil) No. 6063 of 2022), Civil Appeal No. 9097 of 2022, Civil Appeal No. 741 of 2023, Civil Appeal No. 6582 of 2021, Civil Appeal No. 721 of 2020, Civil Appeal No. 6611 of 2021, R.P.(Civil) No. 223 of 2023 in Civil Appeal No. 4484 of 2018, Diary No. 25308 of 2020), Civil Appeal No. 9100 of 2022, Civil Appeal No. 9106 of 2022, Civil Appeal No. 9111 of 2022, Civil Appeal Nos. 565-566 of 2023, Civil Appeal Nos. 567-568 of 2023, Civil Appeal No. 824 of 2023, (@ S.L.P.(Civil) No. 2110 of 2023), Civil Appeal No. 541 of 2023, Civil Appeal No. 540 of 2023, Civil Appeal No. 14702 of 2015, Civil Appeal No. 17533 of 2017, Civil Appeal No. 6596 of 2021, Civil Appeal No. 7028 of 2021, Civil Appeal No. 7029 of 2021, Civil Appeal No. 6610 of 2021, Civil Appeal No. 7030 of 2021, Civil Appeal No. 6608 of 2021, Civil Appeal No. 6594 of 2021, Civil Appeal No. 7338 of 2019, Civil Appeal No. 6609 of 2021, Civil Appeal No. 6605 of 2021, Civil Appeal No. 1505 of 2020, Civil Appeal No. 734 of 2020, Civil Appeal No. 7016 of 2021, Civil Appeal No. 7017 of 2021, Civil Appeal No. 7015 of 2021, Civil Appeal No. 6584 of 2021, Civil Appeal No. 6589 of 2021, Civil Appeal No. 7026 of 2021, Civil Appeal Nos. 9098-9099 of 2022, Civil Appeal No. 3053 of 2018, Civil Appeal No. 7014 of 2021, Civil Appeal No. 6583 of 2021, Civil Appeal No. 7027 of 2021, Civil Appeal No. 6899 of 2021, Connected Appeals filed by the Assessees Civil Appeal No. 15617 of 2017 Civil Appeal No. 10267 of 2017 Civil Appeal Nos. 7738-7739 of 2021 Civil Appeal Nos. 7736-7737 of 2021 Civil Appeal Nos. 7732-7735 of 2021 Civil Appeal No. 10266 of 2017 Civil Appeal No. 10268 of 2017 Civil Appeal Nos. 7740-7743 of 2021
Decided On : 24-04-2023

Advocates appeared:
For Parties Mr. N Venkataraman, A.S.G. Mr. Arijit Prasad, Sr. Adv. Mr. S A Haseeb, Adv. Mr. Zoheb Hussain, Adv. Ms. Gargi Khanna, Adv. Ms. Niranjana Singh, Adv. Mr. Prahlad Singh, Adv. Mr. Rajan Kumar Choursia, Adv. Mr. Prashant Singh II, Adv. Ms. Alka Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Raghvendra Shukla, Adv. Ms. Shruti Shivkumar, Adv. Mr. V. Chandrashekhar Balaji, Adv. Ms. Amritha Chandra Mouli, Adv. Mr. Rahul Vijaya Kumar, Adv. Mr. Raj Bahadur Yadav, AOR Mr. Amrish Kumar, AOR Mrs. Anil Katiyar, AOR Mr. Kavin Gulati, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pawanshree Agrawal, AOR Ms. Soumya Dhankani, Adv. Ms. Shubhangi Negi, Adv. Mr. Praveen Swarup, AOR Mr. Salil Kapoor, Adv. Mr. Sumit Lalchandani, Adv. Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Adv. Mr. Sanat Kapoor, Adv. Mr. Rahul Tomar, Adv. Mr. Chandr Pratap Singh, Adv. Mr. Ajay Kumar Giri, Adv. Mr. Prateesh Kapoor, Sr. Adv. Ms. Sheena Taqui, Adv. Ms. Akansha Saini, Adv. Mr. Dhvanit Chopra, Adv. Mr. Shiv Vinayak Gupta, Adv. Mrs. Bina Gupta, AOR Mr. Ved Jain, Adv. Mr. Nischay Kantoor, Adv. Ms. Richa Mishra, Adv. Mr. Subodh S. Patil, AOR Mr. Sameer Rohatgi, Adv. Mr. Kartikey Singh, Adv. Mr. Sourabh Tandon, Adv. Ms. Ranjeeta Rohatgi, AOR M/S. Khaitan & Co., AOR Mr. Atul Shankar Mathur, Adv. Mrs. Priya Singh, Adv. Mr. Shubhankar, Adv. Ms. Apoorva Jha, Adv. Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Sandeep Bagmar, Adv. Mr. Akhil Abraham Roy, Adv. Mr. Nishith Patel, Adv. Mr. Abhishek Anand, Adv. Ms. Unnimaya S., Adv. M/S. K J John And Co, AOR Ms. Kavita Jha, AOR Mr. Rohit Jain, Adv. Mr. Aniket D Agrawal, Adv. Mr. Vaibhav Kulkarni, Adv. Mr. Rupesh Kumar, AOR Ms. Pankhuri Shrivastava, Adv. Ms. Neelam Sharma, Adv. Mr. Salil Aggarwal, Sr. Adv. Mr. Bhargava V. Desai, AOR Mr. Rahul Gupta, Adv. Mr. Siddhartha Chowdhury, Adv. Mr. Mahir Aggarwal, Adv. Mr. Deepanshu, Adv. Mr. Praveen Swarup, AOR Mr. Siddharth Ranka, Adv. Mr. A. Karthik, AOR Mr. Arsh Khan, Adv. Mr. Vikas Mehta, AOR Mr. Tarun Gupta, AOR Mr. Prakul Khurana, Adv. Mr. Rajat Sharma, Adv. Mr. Abhishek Sharma, Adv. Mr. Atul Kumar, Adv. Mr. Yatinder Chaudhary, Adv. Mr. Davinder Singh Khurana, Adv. Mr. Manoj Rajpoot, Adv. Mr. Vikrant, Adv. Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. Mr. Ambhoj Kumar Sinha, AOR Mr. Somil Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Anshul Mittal, Adv. Mr. Subas Chandra Acharya, Adv. Mr. Akash Agarwala, Adv. Mr. Harsh Raj Singh, Adv. Mr. Ambhoj Kumar Sinha, AOR

IMPORTANT POINT
Scope of assessment – No addition can be made in respect of completed assessments in absence of any incriminating material.

Headnote:

Income Tax Act, 1961 – Section 153A – Scope of assessment – Assessment under Section 153A of Act is linked with search and requisition under Sections 132 and 132A of Act – No addition can be made in respect of completed assessments in absence of any incriminating material – Once during search undisclosed income is found on unearthing incriminating material during search, AO would assume jurisdiction to assess or reassess total income even in case of completed/unabated assessments – Impugned judgment(s) and order(s) passed by High Court taking view that AO has power to reassess return of assessee not only for undisclosed income, which was found during search operation but also with regard to material that was available at the time of original assessment does not require any interference. (Paras 12,13 and 15.1)

Result : Appeals dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

M.R. Shah, J.

1. As common question of law and facts arise in this group of appeals, they are being disposed of by this common judgment and order.

Civil Appeal No. 6580 of 2021 and other connected appeals as mentioned above have been preferred by the Revenue. However Civil Appeal No. 15617 of 2017 and other allied appeals as mentioned above have been preferred by the respective assessees challenging the order passed by the respective High Courts taking the view that in case any incriminating material is found during search then even completed assessments can be assessed or reassessed taking into consideration the incriminating material and other material in possession of the Assessing Officer.

1.1 For the sake of convenience, Civil Appeal No. 6580 of 2021 filed by the Revenue be treated and considered as the lead matter.

2. The core issue involved in the present batch of appeals is the scope of assessment under section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act, 1961’). According to the Revenue, the Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred to as the ‘AO’) is competent to consider all the material that is available on record, including that found during the search, and make an assessment of ‘total income’. Some of the High Courts have agreed with the said proposition. However, according to the respective assessees and as per some of the High Courts’ decisions, if no assessment proceeding is pending on the date of initiation of the search, the AO may consider only the incriminating material found during the search and is precluded from considering any other material derived from any other source.

3. Shri N. Venkataraman, learned Additional Solicitor General of India has appeared on behalf of the Revenue and S/Shri Arvind P. Datar, Kavin Gulati, Preteesh Kapoor, learned Senior Advocates and Shri Ved Jain, learned counsel have appeared on behalf of the respective assessees.

3.1 Shri N. Venkataraman, learned ASG has made the following submissions on behalf of the Revenue :

    (i) It is submitted that under the Act, 1961, the charging section is section 4. It is submitted that thus the income tax is tax on ‘total income.’ It is submitted that the term ‘total income’ has been defined in section 2(45) of the Act, 1961, which means the total amount of income referred to in section 5 and computed in the manner laid down in the Act. It is submitted that as per section 5 of the Act, 1961, the ‘total income’ of any previous year of a person who is a resident includes all income from whatever source derived. It is submitted that therefore the income tax is a tax on all income from whatever source derived in the case of a resident-assessee. Therefore, if any taxable income is left out, the resultant figure would be ‘partial income’ and not ‘total income’. It is submitted that any interpretation of any provision of the Act, 1961 which seeks to exclude any portion of the ‘total income’ from the ambit of taxation runs contrary to the scheme of taxation and hence is impermissible. It is submitted that thus the income tax is a tax on ‘total income,’ the assessee furnishes a return of ‘total income’ (as per Section 139 of the Act, 1961) and the AO assesses ‘total income’ only.

    (ii) It is next submitted that while considering the issue involved, the manner and mode of passing assessment/re-assessment orders is required to be considered. It is submitted that section 139 of the Act, 1961 requires an assessee to furnish his return of total income for the previous year. The return is processed under section 143(1). Sub-sections (2) and (3) contain provision for assessment of ‘total income’ by the AO. It is submitted that there is a possibility that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment in the first instance. Section 147 of the Act, 1961 enables the AO to assess or reassess the case and bring to tax such income a


Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top