The main legal point established in the judgment is that the assessment under Section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 must be made only on the basis of seized material or other post-search material or information available with the assessing officer which can be related to the evidence found during the search. In the absence of any incriminating material, the completed assessment can be reiterated and the abated assessment or reassessment can be made.

JUDGMENT

Manmohan, J. - FACTS

1. The aforesaid appeals have been filed by the Appellant-Revenue, challenging the consolidated order dated 29th June, 2018 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short 'ITAT') in ITA Nos.2131- 2134/Del/2010 for the Assessment Years 2000-01 to 2003-04, whereby the ITAT has upheld separate Orders dated 10th February, 2010 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-III, New Delhi (for short CIT(A) quashing the assessment order(s) dated 28th December, 2007 passed under Section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act, 1961') for the respective Assessment Years pursuant to the search carried out on 22nd September, 2005 at the premises of the Respondent-Assessee under Section 132 of the Act, 1961.

2. Both the appellate authorities, viz., CIT(Appeal) and the ITAT have returned concurrent findings of fact that no incriminating material was found during the search conducted on 22nd September, 2005 warranting assessment under Section 153A of the Act, 1961.

SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE

3. The appeals and questions of law, as formulated by the Appellant- Revenue are premised on the submission that it is not necessary that incriminating material is found during search under Section 132 of the Act, 1961 for an order under Section 153A of the Act, 1961 to be passed even where original assessments have attained finality and have not abated. The questions of law as suggested in one of the appeal being ITA 527/2019 are reproduced hereinbelow:-

'A.Whether Ld. ITAT has erred in dismissing the appeal of the revenue by relying on the decision of the Hon'ble High Court in CIT v. Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 573 CIT, without properly appreciating the provisions contained in section 153A of the IT Act which does not require to have any incriminating material found during the search and seizure action as an essential requirement for making an addition in the assessment?

B.Whether the Ld. ITAT has erred in dismissing the appeal of the revenue by relying on the decision of the Hon'ble High Court in CIT v. Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 573, without properly appreciating the provisions contained in Section 153A which starts with the nonobstante clause which seeks to operate in the supersession of provisions contained in Section 139, 147, 148, 149, 151 and 153?

C.Whether Ld. ITAT has erred in dismissing the appeal of the revenue by relying on the decision of the Hon'ble High Court in CIT v. Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 473, without properly appreciating the provisions contained in Section 153A which have been inserted w.e.f. 01.06.2003 after the provisions contained in Section 158 BC and other allied provisions contained in chapter XIV - B which were made inapplicable after 31.05.2003 as per section 158BI of the IT Act?

D.Whether the Hon'ble ITAT has erred in not appreciating the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court's decision in the case of CIT(Central) Kanpur vs. Rajkumar Arora (2014) 211 Taxmann 453 that the assessing officer has power to reassess returns 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?

E.Whether the Ld. ITAT has erred in allowing the appeal of the assessee without examining the merits of the additions made pursuant to the recasted Profit and Loss Account submitted by the assessee in response to notice issued under Section 153A?

4. By way of separate applications bearing CM Nos.49886-49889 of 2019, the Appellant Revenue has filed judgments of the Supreme Court of India in PGF Ltd. v. UOI [2015] 13 SCC 50 and Punjab & Haryana High Court in PGF v. UOI [2004] SCC Online P&H 676 and proposed two further questions of law on the basis of findings of the High Court and Supreme Court wherein the sale and purchase of agricultural land by the Respondent-Assessee have been held by Courts to bogus/sham/paper transactions.

5. During the course of hearing before this Court, the learned Senior Standing Couns