Assessment was framed under section 153A read with section 143(3) vide order dated 4-3-2015 in. Assessee challenged the assessment order on ground that assessment order so farmed was barred by limitation, as same ought to have been framed on or before 31-3-2014.CIT(A) affirmed the order of the Assessing Officer. On appeal the Revenue contended that reason for passing assessment order on 4-3-2015 was that a reference under section 90 was made to Swiss authority regarding details of bank account of assessee but no information till time of passing assessment order was received and, hence time limit was extended by one year under Explanation IX to section 153B. However, relevant clauses of DTAA between India and Switzerland showed that same was effective from 1-4-2011 and this was further clarified from Notification No. S.O.2903(E) dated 27-12-2011. Information called for by department from Swiss authorities could not have been received by them for period prior to 1-4-2011. Reference had been made calling for information for period from 1-4-1995 to 31-3-2012 hence period of limitation could not be extended as claimed by revenue and assessments were clearly barred by limitation and quashed. (AY. 2006-07 to 2011-12)
Praveen Sawhney. v. ACIT (2023) 201 ITD 539 / 224 TTJ 46(Delhi) (Trib.)/Sangeeta Sawhney v. ACIT (2023) 201 ITD 539/ 224 TTJ 46 (Delhi) (Trib.)
S. 69A : Unexplained money-Foreign bank account-Bank details for period 1-4-1995 to 31-3-2012-Information called for by revenue could not have been received for period prior to 1-4-2011-Period of limitation cannot be extended-Order is barred by limitation-DTAA-India-Switzerland [S. 90, 132, 143(3), 153A]