VIBHU BAKHRU, J. (ORAL)

1. The Petitioner [the Assessee] has filed the present petition, inter alia, impugning the proceedings initiated pursuant to the notice dated 19.12.2023 [impugned notice] issued under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [the Act] in respect of Assessment Year [AY] 2015-16.

2. The Assessee had filed the return of income for the relevant AY 2015-16, on 30.09.2015, declaring a total income of ₹32,61,010/-. On 18.10.2019, search and seizure operation were conducted under Section 132 of the Act in respect of persons belonging to the Alankit Group. Thereafter, on 19.12.2023, the notice under Section 153C of the Act was issued which is

impugned in present petition.

3. The Assessing Officer [AO] of the searched person had recorded a satisfaction note dated 24.06.2022 [the satisfaction note] to the effect that he was satisfied that the documents belonging or containing information relating to the assessee, were found during the course of search. The satisfaction note also records that the documents in question were handed over to the AO exercising jurisdiction in the case of the assessee.

4. It is the Petitioner’s case that no proceedings under Section 153C can be continued pursuant to the impugned notice in respect of AY 2015-16 because an assessment order cannot be passed pursuant to the impugned notice as the time limit for framing an assessment order has since lapsed.

5. Mr. Gupta, learned counsel appearing for the Revenue sought to contend that the material and documents were received by the AO exercising jurisdiction in the case of the assessee on 09.06.2023 and, therefore, the time for passing the assessment order had not elapsed as on the date the present petition was filed. However, he fairly stated that the said position would not hold true as there are no ground to disbelieve the facts as recorded in the satisfaction note, which was recorded on 24.06.2022.

6. The contention that the said satisfaction note and documents could not be served on the AO exercising jurisdiction in the case of assessee is clearly insubstantial. Mr. Gupta, fairly states that he would not advance submissions to the said effect as the import of such submission is that a false statement was recorded in the satisfaction note, which would render it a false document.

7. Before proceeding further, it is relevant to note that the satisfaction note clearly records that the documents have been handed over to the AO of the other person [in this case the Assessee]. The relevant extract of the satisfaction note is set out below:

“In view of the above, I am satisfied that these documents also contain information which relates to above referred ‘other person’ and have a bearing on the determination of its total income. Accordingly, these documents are handed over to the AO of other person, for necessary action in the case of the above referred ‘other person’ under Section 153C of the I.T. Act 1961 for the relevant assessment years as per the seized documents.” [emphasis added]

8. We also consider it apposite to refer to sub-section (1) of the Section 153C of the Act which is set out below:

“153C. Assessment of income of any other person.—[(1)] [Notwithstanding anything contained in Section 139, Section 147, Section 148, Section 149, Section 151 and Section 153, where the Assessing Officer is satisfied that,— (a) any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing, seized or requisitioned, belongs to; or (b) any books of account or documents, seized or requisitioned, pertains or pertain to, or any information contained therein, relates to, a person other than the person referred to in Section 153-A, then, the books of account or documents or assets, seized or requisitioned shall be handed over to the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction over such other person] [and that Assessing Officer shall proceed against each such other person and issue notice and assess or reassess the income of the

other person in accordance with the provisions