CIT v. Himalaya Drug Company (2024) 471 ITR 763/169 taxmann.com 244 (SC) Editorial : CIT v. Himalaya Drug Company (2023) 22 ITR-OL 33(Karn)(HC)/ 2021 SCC online Kar 16067

S. 153C : Assessment-Income of any other person-Search-Notice issued prior to transfer of case-Notice and order is bad in law-The amendment by insertion of clause (c) in sub section (3) of section 124(3)(c)m by Finance Act, 2016(2016) 384 ITR 1 (St), which came into effect from 1-6-2016 is prospective in nature-Order of High Court is affirmed-SLP of revenue is dismissed. [S. 124, 127(2), Art. 136]

On writ the High Court held that a notice under section 153C was served on assessee on 11-5-2009 by DCIT, Central Circle 1(1).Meanwhile, an order under section 127(2) was issued on 20-7-2009 by Commissioner, Bangaluru and case of assessee was transferred from ACIT, Circle 6(1) to DCIT, Central Circle 1(1), Bangalore.However notices under section 153C were issued by DCIT, Central Circle, Bangaluru on 11-5-2009 and furthermore, date of transfer of files from ACIT was 19-8-2009. High Court held that it was ex-facie apparent that notices under section 153C were issued prior to transfer of case and jurisdiction conferred on DCIT and since notice issued by DCIT, Circle-1(1), Bangalore, was without jurisdiction, all further proceedings would be rendered void ab initio.  High Court also  held that amendment by insertion of clause (c) in sub section (3) of section 124 by Finance Act, 2016 which came into effect from 1-6-2016 is prospective in nature. SLP filed by revenue against impugned order of High Court is  dismissed.  (AY. 2003-04 to 2008-09)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*