Ms. Sushma Chowla, J.M. OEDER These five appeals filed by assessee are against separate orders of CIT(A), Central-IV, Mumbai relating to asst. yrs. 1998-99 to 20 1-02 and asst. yr. 20 4-05 all against order under s. 143(3) r/w s. 153A of IT Act. 2 . In all years, assessee has raised same grounds of appeal Nos. 1 to 6, which are as under : "1. learned CIT(A) has not considered fact that notice under s. 153A of IT Act, 1961 issued by Asstt. CIT Central Circle 22 is illegal. 2. notice issued under s. 153A by AO is bad in law and as well as on fact of case. 3. learned CIT(A) has not considered fact that no search action under s. 132 was on appellant firm and appellant was not covered by search on SSKI Group by warrant dt. 1st Aug., 20 3. No warrant has been issued in name of appellant firm. 4. Asstt. CIT Cent. Circle - 22 Mumbai has erred in not considering our letter dt. 17th July, 20 5 filed in his office on 5th Aug., 20 5. 5. learned CIT(A) has confirmed disallowance sum of Rs. 27,59,046 (in asst. yr. 1998-99) Rs. 33,62,100 (in asst. yr. 1999- 20 0) Rs. 29,55,598 (in asst. yr. 20 0-01) Rs. 17,27,812 (in asst. yr. 20 4-05) being interest paid on loans and advances under s. 14A of IT Act, 1961. 6. disallowance of interest made by AO under s. 14A is bad in law and as well, as on fact of case." 3. assessee further raised ground No. 7 in asst. yrs. 1999- 20and 20 4-05, which is as under : "7. DC Cent. Circle 22 Mumbai has erred in disallowing other business administrative expenses amounting to Rs. 2,96,770 (such as Electricity Charges Rs. 2,00,000 Staff Salary Rs. 50,000 Motor Car expenses Rs. 38,263 and Telephone Expenses Rs. 8,507) Rs. 71,092 (such as Staff Salary Rs. 50,000 n d Telephone expenses Rs. 21,092) respectively, while passing order under s. 143(3) r/w s. 153A of IT Act, 1961 which is bad in law." 4 . assessee in asst. yr. 20 1-02 has raised ground Nos. 5 and 6 on similar disallowance of electricity, which are as under : "5. learned CIT(A) has not considered fact that appellant has incurred sum of Rs. 3,00,000 being electricity expenses during year for earlier period which was crystallized during this assessment year and should be allowed as deduction while computing business income of your appellant. 6. Asstt. CIT Cent Circle 22. Mumbai has erred in disallowing other business administrative expenses amounting to Rs. 3,00,000 (such as electricity expenses Rs. 3,00,000) while passing order under s. 143(3) r/w s. 153A of IT Act." All said appeals relating to same assessee were heard together n d are being disposed off by this consolidated order for sake of convenience. 5 . brief facts of case are that assessee is carrying on business of Polyester Filament Yarn, Fabrics and Securities, Commission Agent and letting out of property. assessee firm is constituted of three partners viz., Mr. Sanjay M. Jathia, Mr. Sudhir M. Jathia and Ms. Pushpa Devi M. Agarwal. Search and seizure operations were carried out under s. 132 of IT Act on SSKI Group by warrant dt. 1st Aug., 20 3. name of assessee firm is also there in said search warrant. Notice under s. 153A of Act was issued to assessee on 13th June, 20 5 for asst. yr. 1998-99 onwards. In response to said notice. Returns of income were filed by assessee on 24th Aug., 20 5 for all above said years declaring undermentioned incomes : Asst. yr, Income declared (in Rs.) 1998-99 1,15,214 1999- 20 2,49,848 20 0-01 (Loss) 4,62,798 20 1-02 (Loss) 7,30,342 20 4-05 73,059 6 . notice under s. 143(2) was issued in all above said years including asst. yr. 20 4-05 on 26th Aug., 20 5. assessee appeared in response to said notice and filed reply to detailed questionnaire issued along with notice under s. 142(1) of IT Act on 21st Sept., 20 5. original assessment in all above said years except 20 4-05 were completed under s. 143(3) of IT Act on different dates and certain additions were made on account of disallowances out of salary expenses, telephone expenses, motor car expenses and also disallowance under s. 14A of Act. Since assessee had not contested initial order under s. 143(3) of IT Act, all additions and disallowances were again made in order under s. 143(3) r/w s. 153A of IT Act. AO further made disallowance out of interest account and in some years out of electricity expenses. 7. CIT(A) dismissed plea of assessee against issue of notice under s. 153A of IT Act that there was no search action on assessee. On verification of warrant issued from office of DG (Inv.), Mumbai, it was found that said warrant was standing in name of M/s J.M. Trading Corporation i.e., assessee herein. Accordingly, CIT(A) held that notice issued under s. 153A was validly issued. CIT(A) upheld additions on account of interest under s. 14A of IT Act and electricity expenses against property income earned by assessee in some of years. assessee is aggrieved and hence present appeals. 8 . learned Authorised Representative for assessee stated that search and seizure operations were carried out on SSKI Group, to whom premises at Tulsiyana Chambers, Nariman Point, Mumbai have been let out w.e.f. 11th July, 1996. learned Authorised Representative further pointed out that partners of assessee firm were part of M/s Mohanlal Jathia Group n d they have no relation or business connection with SSKI Group. It was vehemently stated by learned Authorised Representative for assessee that they were not in premises wherein search and seizure operations were carried out. learned Authorised Representative further pointed out that though his name is mentioned in Panchnama but said Panchnama was served on Mr. Hitesh M. Desai and address mentioned in said Panchnama are six offices which belong to assessee and its sister concerns; but are let out to SSKI Group. learned Authorised Representative further stated that he would not challenge satisfaction of initiating search procedure but would challenge validity of notice issued under s. 153A of IT Act. learned Authorised Representative further stated that no search and seizure operations under s. 132 were carried out on assessee, nor any requisition was made under s. 132A of Act. learned Authorised Representative further stated that search/s should be on persons specific and premises specific, but in present set of facts though Panchnama is in name of assessee firm, but no search operations were initiated at addresses on which assessee is found. Reference was invited to provisions of s. 153A of IT Act wherein starting point is search initiated . But, under sub-cl. (d) to s. 153A, word used are search conducted . learned Authorised Representative further stressed that mere availability of search warrant in name of assessee does not prove that search warrant was actually executed and search was actually conducted in case of assessee. Reliance was placed on under-mentioned decision. (i) Smt. Sita Devi vs. CIT (1979) 12 CTR (P&H) 108 : (1980) 122 ITR 105 (P&H). 9. In alternative, claim of assessee was that is it mandatory to pass reassessment order under s. 153A of Act even if no undisclosed income or property is detected during course of search. learned Authorised Representative further pointed out that though in new s. 153A of Act there is no mention of undisclosed income for block period but provisions of s. 132 are still on statute. He further stated that under garb of s. 153A of Act, AO by way of change of opinion cannot make roving enquiries to make additions when nothing was found during course of search. Elaborate submissions were made on merits of additions made during respective years, which shall be referred to under respective grounds of additions. 10. learned Departmental Representative for Revenue stressed that assessee has not challenged search carried out on assessee. learned Departmental Representative stressed that under s. 132(1) of Act, when officer has information and reason to believe, then such Officers can be authorized to enter and search any building belonging to assessee. It was further stated that validity of search cannot be challenged before Tribunal as held by Special Bench of Lucknow Tribunal in Nawal Kishore & Sons Jewellers vs. Dy. CIT ( 20 3) 81 TTJ (Lucknow)(SB) 362 : ( 20 3) 87 ITD 407 (Lucknow)(SB). learned Departmental Representative further stated that once warrant is issued in name of person, searches were carried out and if nothing is found by way of books of account, bullion, jewellery etc. it does n o t mean search has become null and void. learned Departmental Representative further stated that challenging subsequent proceedings is challenging search proceedings and once initiation of search has not been challenged by assessee, subsequent proceedings cannot be challenged. provisions of s. 153A of Act was introduced w.e.f. 1st June, 20 3 and search action in present case has taken place after said amendment. learned Departmental Representative further pointed out that s. 153A begins with non-obsolete clause which overrides other provisions and sections and words used in section are shall . Accordingly, it is incumbent upon AO to issue notice and to assess such income belonging to assessee. learned Departmental Representative stressed that execution of search proceedings are initiated as proceedings started from time when warrant of authorization is signed by authorities and unless and until it is cancelled or nullified by Court, authorized person enters upon premises of assessee and search said premises in order to execute warrant issued against such person. learned Departmental Representative further stated that s. 153A talks of assessment or reassessment, empowering AO with much more powers than as provided in s. 158BC of Act. section empowers AO to make reassessment even if issue has already been decided. learned Departmental Representative further made comments in reply to additions made in case under interest expenses and electricity expenses, which shall be dealt with later. 11. In rejoinder, learned Authorised Representative for assessee vehemently stated that assessee was not challenging that there was no search and was also not challenging satisfaction in issue of warrant of authorization. learned Authorised Representative further stated that there cannot be search of assessee when assessee was not found at particular premises nor any valuables of assessee were found at said address. Reliance was placed on judgment of Hon ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Kalvinator of India Ltd. ( 20 2) 174 CTR (Del)(FB) 617 : ( 20 2) 256 ITR 1 (Del)(FB). 12. We have heard rival submissions and perused record. Search and seizure operations were carried out on 1st Aug., 20 3 at 701, 702, 703, 704, 803 and 804, Tulsiyan Chambers, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 21. As per Panchnama, search was initiated at above said flats in Tulsiyan Chambers, Nariman Point, Mumbai on 2nd Aug., 20 3 at 8.00 a.m. and was concluded on 3rd Aug., 20 3 at 4.00 p.m. perusal of Panchnama reveals warrant of search was issued in undermentioned names : Shri Shreyas S. Morakhia Shripal S. Morakhia, directors of S.S. Kantilal Ishwarlal Securities (P) Ltd. SSKI Investor Services (P) Ltd. SSKI Securities (P) Ltd. SSKI Corporate Finance (P) Ltd. SSKI Finance Ltd., Indrian Production (P) Ltd. and Trading Corporation 13. During course of appellate proceedings, query letter was sent to AO to obtain copy of warrant from office of DG (Inv.), Mumbai to categorically comment whether warrant was in name of assessee. AO sent copy of warrant to CIT(A), which in-turn was shown to learned Authorised Representative for assessee and it revealed that warrant was actually standing in name of J.M. Trading Corporation i.e., assessee herein. 14. Search and seizure operations were carried out by vesting of powers under s. 132 of IT Act s. 132 reads as under : "132. (1) Where Director General or Director or Chief CIT or CIT or any such Jt. Director or Jt. CIT as may be empowered in this behalf by Board, in consequence of information in his possession, has reason to believe that (a) any person to whom summons under sub-s. (1) of s. 37 of Indian IT Act, 1922 (11 of 1922), or under sub-s. (1) of s. 131 of this Act, or notice under sub-s. (4) of s. 22 of Indian IT Act, 1922, or under sub-s. (1) of s. 142 of this Act was issued to produce, or cause to be produced, any books of account or other documents has omitted or failed to produce, or cause to be produced, such books of account or other documents as required by such summons or notice, or (b) any person to whom summons or notice as aforesaid has been or might be issued will not, or would not, produce or cause to be produced, any books of account or other documents which will be useful for, or relevant to, any proceeding under Indian IT Act, 1922 (11 of 1922), or under this Act, or (c) any person is in possession of any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing and such money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing represents either wholly or partly income or property which has not been, or would not be, disclosed for purposes of Indian IT Act, 1922 (11 of 1922), or this Act (hereinafter in this section referred to as undisclosed income or property), then, (A) Director General or Director or Chief CIT or CIT, as case may be, may authorise any Jt. Director, Jt. CIT, Asstt. Director or Dy. Director, Asstt. CIT or Dy. CIT or ITO, or (B) such Jt. Director, or Jt. CIT, as case may be, may authorise any Asstt. Director or Dy. Director, Asstt. CIT or Dy. CIT or ITO, (the officer so authorised in all cases being hereinafter referred to as authorised officer) to (i) enter and search any building, place, vessel, vehicle or aircraft where he has reason to suspect that such books of account, other documents, money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing are kept; (ii) break open lock of any door, box, locker, safe, almirah or other receptacle for exercising powers conferred by cl. (i) where keys thereof are not available; (iia) search any person who has got out of, or is about to get into, or is in, building, place, vessel, vehicle or aircraft, if authorised officer has reason to suspect that such person has secreted about his person any such books of account, other documents, money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing; (iib) require any person who is found to be in possession or control of any books of account or other documents maintained in form of electronic record as defined in cl. (t) of sub-s. (1) of s. 2 of Information Technology Act, 20(21 of 20 0), to afford authorised officer necessary facility to inspect such books of account or other documents; (iii) seize any such books of account, other documents, money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing found as result of such search : Provided that bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing, being stock-in-trade of business, found as result of such search shall not be seized but authorised officer shall make note or inventory of such stock-in- trade of business; (iv) place marks of identification on any books of account or other documents or make or cause to be made extracts or copies therefrom; (v) make note or inventory of any such money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing : Provided that where any building, place, vessel, vehicle or aircraft referred to in cl. (i) is within area of jurisdiction of any 87 (Chief CIT or CIT), but such (Chief CIT or CIT) has no jurisdiction over person referred to in cl. (a) or cl. (b) or cl. (c), then, notwithstanding anything contained in s. (1 20 ), it shall be competent for him to exercise powers under this sub-section in all cases where he has reason to believe that any delay in getting authorisation from (Chief CIT or CIT) having jurisdiction over such person may be prejudicial to interests of Revenue : Provided further that where it is not possible or practicable to take physical possession of any valuable article or thing and remove it to safe place due to its volume, weight or other physical characteristics or due to its being of dangerous nature, authorised officer may serve order on owner or person who is in immediate possession or control thereof that he shall not remove, part with or otherwise deal with it, except with previous permission of such authorised officer and such action of authorised officer shall be deemed to be seizure of such valuable article or thing under cl. (iii) : Provided also that nothing contained in second proviso shall apply in case of any valuable article or thing, being stock-in-trade of business. (1A) Where any (Chief CIT or CIT), in consequence of information in his possession, has reason to suspect that any books of account, other documents, money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing in respect of which officer has been authorised by (Director General or Director) or any other (Chief CIT or CIT) or any such (Jt. Director) or (Jt. CIT) as may be empowered in this behalf by Board to take action under cls. (i) to (v) of sub-s. (1) are or is kept in any building, place, vessel, vehicle or aircraft not mentioned in authorisation under sub-s. (1), such (Chief CIT or CIT) may, notwithstanding anything contained in s. (1 20 ), authorise said officer to take action under any of clauses aforesaid in respect of such building, place, vessel, vehicle or aircraft. (2) authorised officer may requisition services of any police officer or of any officer of Central Government, or of both, to assist him for all or any of purposes specified in sub-s. (1) or sub-s. (1A) and it shall be duty of every such officer to comply with such requisition. (3) authorised officer may, where it is not practicable to seize any such books of account, other documents, money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing, for reasons other than those mentioned in second proviso to sub-s. (1), serve order on owner or person who is in immediate possession or control thereof that he shall not remove, part with or otherwise deal with it except, with previous permission of such officer and such officer may take such steps as may be necessary for ensuring compliance with this sub-section. Explanation. For removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that serving of order as aforesaid under this sub-section shall not be deemed to be seizure of such books of account, other documents, money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing under cl. (iii) of sub-s. (1). (4) authorised officer may, during course of search or seizure, examine on oath any person who is found to be in possession or control of any books of account, documents, money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing and any statement made by such person during such examination may thereafter be used in evidence in any proceeding under Indian IT Act, 1922 (11 of 1922), or under this Act. Explanation. For removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that examination of any person under this sub-section may be not merely in respect o f any books of account, other documents or assets found as result of search, but also in respect of all matters relevant for purposes of any investigation connected with any proceeding under Indian IT Act, 1922 (11 of 1922), or under this Act. (4A) Where any books of account, other documents, money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing are or is found in possession or control of any person in course of search, it may be presumed (i) that such books of account, other documents, money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing belong or belongs to such person; (ii) that contents of such books of account and other documents are true; and (iii) that signature and every other part of such books of account and other documents which purport to be in handwriting of any particular person or which may reasonably be assumed to have been signed by, or to be in handwriting of, any particular person, are in that person s handwriting, and in case of document stamped, executed or attested, that it was duly stamped and executed or attested by person by whom it purports to have been so executed or attested. (5) ** ** ** (6) ** ** ** (7) ** ** ** (8) books of account or other documents seized under sub-s. (1) [or sub-s. (1A) shall not be retained by authorised officer for period exceeding thirty days from date of order of assessment under (s. 153A or) cl. (c) of s. 158BC] unless reasons for retaining same are recorded by him in writing and approval of (Chief CIT, CIT, Director General or Director) for such retention is obtained : Provided that [Chief CIT, CIT, Director General or Director shall not authorise retention of books of account and other documents for period exceeding thirty days after all proceedings under Indian IT Act, 1922 (11 of 1922)], or this Act in respect of years for which books of account or other documents are relevant are completed. (8A) order under sub-s. (3) shall not be in force for period exceeding sixty days from date of order. (9) person from whose custody any books of account or other documents are seized under sub-s. (1) [or sub-s. (1A)] may make copies thereof, or take extracts therefrom, in presence of authorised officer or any other person empowered by him in this behalf, at such place and time as authorised officer may appoint in this behalf. (9A) Where authorised officer has no jurisdiction over person referred to in cl. (a) or cl. (b) or cl. (c) of sub-s. (1), books of account or other documents, or any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing (hereafter in this section and in ss. 132A and 132B referred to as assets) seized under that sub-section shall be handed over by authorised officer to AO having jurisdiction over such person within period of sixty days from date on which last of authorisations for search was executed and thereupon powers exercisable by authorised officer under sub-s. (8) or sub-s. (9) shall be exercisable by such AO. (10) If person legally entitled to books of account or other documents seized under sub-s. (1) or sub-s. (1A.) objects for any reason to approval given by Chief CIT, CIT, Director General or Director under sub-s. (8), he may make application to Board stating therein reasons for such objection and requesting for return of books of account or other documents and Board may, after giving applicant opportunity of being heard, pass such orders as it thinks fit. (11) ** ** ** (11A) ** ** ** (12) ** ** ** (13) provisions of CrPC, 1973 (2 of 1974), relating to searches and seizure shall apply, so far as may be, to searches and seizure under sub-s. (1) or sub-s. (1A). (14) Board may make rules in relation to any search or seizure under this section, in particular, and without prejudice to generality of foregoing power, such rules may provide for procedure to be followed by authorised officer (i) for obtaining ingress into any building, place, vessel, vehicle or aircraft) to be searched where free ingress thereto is not available; (ii) for ensuring safe custody of any books of account or other documents or assets seized. Explanation 1. For purposes of sub-s. (9A), execution of authorisation for search shall have same meaning as assigned to it in Expln. 2 to s. 158BE. Explanation 2. In this section, word proceeding means any proceeding in respect of any year, whether under Indian IT Act, 1922 (11 of 1922), or this Act, which may be pending on date on which search is authorised under this section or which may have been completed on or before such date and includes also all proceedings under this Act which may be commenced after such date in respect of any year." 15. Under provisions of s. 132 of IT Act, where officers have information in his possession that any person shall not comply with condition in cls. (a), (b) and (c) to s. 132(1) of IT Act, then, he may authorize such officers to enter and search any building, place, vehicle etc. of person and seize any books of account other documents, money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable articles or things found as result of search. It has been provided further under s. 132(1) of IT Act that where it is not possible or practicable to take physical possession of any valuable, article or thing and remove it to place due to its characteristics, authorized officer may serve order on owner or person in possession or control that he should not remove, part with or otherwise deal with, except with previous permission of such authorized officer. Such action of authorized officer shall be deemed to be seizure of such valuable article or thing under cl. (iii) to s. 132(1) of IT Act. provisions of s. 132(3) of IT Act empowers authorized officer to serve order on such owner or person who is in possession or control of such assets which could not be seized, restraining him from removing parting or otherwise dealing with aforesaid assets. By way of explanation, it has been clarified that serving of order under this sub-section i.e., 132(3) of Act shall not be deemed to be seizure of search of books of account, other documents etc. as under cl. (iii) of sub-s. (1) to s. 132 of IT Act. Sub-s. (4) to s. 132 empowers authorized officer to examine on oath any person who is found to be in possession or control of such assets during course of search and seizure. Sub-s. (4A) to s. 132 provides that contents of books of account and other documents are true and also such books of account other document, money, bullion jewellery belongs to such person from whose possession if was found. Cls. (5), (6) and (7) to s. 132 have been omitted w.e.f. 1st June, 20 2. Under cl. (8), it has been provided that books of account or other documents seized shall not be retained for more than 30 days from date of order of assessment unless approval for further retention is obtained sub-s. (8A) to s. 132 at relevant time provided that order under s. 132(3) shall be in-force only for period 60 days from date of order and by reasons recorded in writing, said period of operation of order could be extended beyond 60 days after obtaining approval from authorities. 16. Sec. 132(1) provides that Director General or Director or Chief CIT or CIT or Jt. CIT or Jt. Director may authorize officer to conduct search and seizure operations. It is further provided that under s. 132(1) of Act that ( officer so authorized in all cases being hereinafter referred to as authorized officer ) and thereafter duties and powers of such authorised officer are enumerated in sub-cls. (i) to (v) under s. 132(1) of IT Act. Further powers and duties are enumerated in provisos under s. 132(1) and thereafter also in sub-ss. (2) to (9A) of s. 132 of IT Act. 17. Under provisions s. 132 of IT Act, authorized officer has reason to believe because of information in his possession that; (a) Where person to whom notice under s. 142 of Act has been i s s u e d fails to produce books of account or other documents as requisitioned; (b) person to whom notice has been issued will not produce books of account in lieu of issue of notice under s. 142 of Act; (c) person who is in possession of any money, bullion or valuable article or thing which constitutes his undisclosed income. 18. In facts of present case, search on SSKI Group was carried out, who are carrying out their business activity from premises owned by assessee. said premises are rented by assessee and its sister-concern to SSKI group of companies. rental income received from SSKI group of companies is assessed from income from property in hands of assessee i s apparent from order under s. 143(3) of IT Act. assessability of rental income in hands of assessee proves that premises were occupied by SSKI Group as tenant of assessee, though said premises are owned by assessee. As mentioned in paras hereinabove, books of account and valuables of SSKI Group were found and seized during course of search operations. No books of account of assessee were claimed to be kept in said premises, similarly no valuables belonging to assessee were claimed to be available in said premises. During course of search, n o books of account or valuables were found or seized which belongs to assessee, from said premises. assessee admittedly is operating from 401, Arcade Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai 21, but business premises of t h e assessee nor residential premises of Directors of assessee company were covered under aforesaid search and seizure action. In view of totality of facts narrated hereinabove, only question to be determined is whether search was conducted against assessee. 19. Sec. 153A of IT Act provides as under : "153A. Notwithstanding anything contained in s. 139, s. 147, s. 148, s. 149, s. 151 and s. 153, in case of person where search is initiated under s. 132 or books of account, other documents or any assets are requisitioned under s. 132A after 31st day of May, 20 3, AO shall (a) issue notice to such person requiring him to furnish within such period, as may be specified in notice, return of income in respect of each assessment year falling within six assessment years referred to in cl. (b), in prescribed form and verified in prescribed manner and setting forth such other particulars as may be prescribed and provisions of this Act shall, so far as may be, apply accordingly as if such return were return required to be furnished under s. 139; (b) assess or reassess total income of six assessment years immediately preceding assessment year relevant to previous year in which such search is conducted or requisition is made : Provided that AO shall assess or reassess total income in respect of each assessment year falling within such six assessment years : Provided further that assessment or reassessment, if any, relating to any assessment year falling within period of six assessment years referred to in this section pending on date of initiation of search under s. 132 or making of requisition under s. 132A, as case may be, shall abate. Explanation. For removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that, (i) save as otherwise provided in this section, s. 153B and s. 153C, all other provisions of this Act shall apply to assessment made under this section; (ii) in assessment or reassessment made in respect of assessment year under this section, tax shall be chargeable at rate or rates as applicable to such assessment year." 20 . perusal of section reveals that in case person against whom search is initiated under s. 132 of Act or books of account or other document are requisitioned under s. 132A of Act, then notwithstanding anything contained in ss. 139, 147, 148, 149, 151 and 153 of IT Act, AO shall issue notice to such person requiring him to furnish returns of income in respect of six assessment years preceding assessment year relevant to previous year in which such search was conducted or requisition made. Sec. 153A of Act thus talks of two steps i.e., (i) initiation of search and (ii) conduct of search. question of validity of search i.e., satisfaction recorded before of search. question of validity of search i.e., satisfaction recorded before issue of search warrant cannot be looked into by Tribunal as held by Hon ble Delhi High Court in M.B. Lal vs. CIT ( 20 5) 199 CTR (Del) 571 : ( 20 5) 279 ITR 298 (Del). Thus, in facts of present case, where Panchnama was issued in name of SSKI Group and name of assessee is also mentioned at bottom of list, search is initiated against assessee. 2 1 . question for our determination is whether search was though initiated against assessee was conducted on assessee. initiation of search and conduct of search are two different aspects of search and seizure proceedings. In present case, search was initiated by issue of warrant of authorization. conduct of search proceedings is elaborated procedure enumerated under s. 132 of IT Act, which in cl. 1 categorically authorizes officer to enter and search any building, place, vessel etc. where he has reason to believe that books of account, money, bullion, jewellery or things belonging to assessee are kept. perusal of panchnama reveals that search was conducted in respect of SSKI Group wherein search warrant was served on Mr. Hitesh M. Desai, who is Manager of SSKI Group, his statement was recorded during course of search. books of account as per Annex. A-1 and other valuables, locker, FD as per Annex. O-1 belonging to SSKI Group were found and seized. Other valuable articles including money as per note in 1, 2, 3, 4 were found but not seized. assessee claims that none of his books of account were found or seized and in respect of valuables also assessee clarifies that none of his valuables were available at above said address as said premises were rented out to SSKI Group by assessee and its sister concerns. In body of order under s. 143(3) r/w s. 153A of IT Act, AO also observes that there was search and seizure action under s. 132 of IT Act on SSKI Group and by warrant dt. 1st Aug., 20 3, assessee was also covered under search. premises whereas assessee was found was not searched. 22. fact that search under s. 132 of Act have been conducted on assessee, is condition precedent to be satisfied before start of any proceedings against assessee. Sec. 158BC of IT Act, provides procedure for block assessment in all such cases where search has been conducted under s. 132 or books of account or other documents requisitioned under s. 132A of IT Act for searches conducted upto 31st May, 20 3. Thus, jurisdictional fact of search being conducted prior to issue of notice under s. 158BC of Act need to be satisfied. Special Bench of Bangalore Tribunal in C. Ramaiah Reddy vs. Asstt. CIT ( 20 3) 81 TTJ (Bang)(SB) 1044 : ( 20 4) 268 ITR 491 (Bang)(SB)(AT) held as under : ". . . . . . . .The Tribunal need be satisfied only about validity of search under s. 132 based on valid authorization. jurisdictional fact that needs to be satisfied before AO can issue notice under s. 158BC is that search under s. 132 should have been conducted on assessee. Tribunal, therefore, needs to satisfy itself that search was indeed conducted with reference to assessee in question. search should not merely have been initiated, but conducted. Hence, Tribunal is required to verify whether jurisdictional facts exist before notice can be issued under s. 158BC." 23. Tribunal though cannot determine propriety of search but Tribunal has inherent power to verify that there was search on assessee and Panchnama prepared was legal. said principle has also been held by Special Bench of Bangalore Tribunal in C. Ramaiah Reddy s case (supra). Applying ratio of decision of Special Bench in C. Ramaiah Reddy s case (supra) to facts of present case, we find that though warrant of authorization was issued in name of assessee proving fact of initiation of search against assessee. But, in facts of present case, where assessee is not to be found on said premises though owned by assessee but rented out to separate concern, income from which is assessed under head property income, established that no search was conducted at premises at which assessee is found and available. word conduct is defined in Law Lexicon as Management; Conducting of affair (as conduct of business); Conduct of campaign; conduct of sale. It further states conducting requires most wisdom and knowledge. 24. Sec. 132 of IT Act thus provides acts and deeds to be carried out by search team at premises of assessee. conduct of search includes acts, deeds and things enumerated under s. 132 of IT Act which authorized officer is bound to carry out in order to complete process of search. Search is invasion of privacy of assessee and all proceedings connected with search need to be carried out within framework of provisions of Act. In case of non-compliance to provisions of Act by authorised officer, such searches are invalid and illegal. In present case before us, no search was conducted against assessee as premises occupied by assessee were not entered upon and searched by authorised officer. Mere search of premises owned by assessee but rented to another concern does not by any implication prove conduct of search against assessee in view of fact that assessee was not available at address searched upon. Mere mentioning of name in Panchnama does not lead to conclusion that valid search was conducted against assessee. In totality of circumstances, where no search has been conducted against assessee there is no merit in issue of notice under s. 153A of IT Act under which jurisdictional area of operation is six assessment years immediately preceding assessment year relevant to previous year, in which search was conducted. In case, no search is conducted against person, period of operation to which provisions of s. 153A would apply, cannot be determined and invoking of provisions of s. 153A of Act is baseless. Though provisions of s. 158BC of Act are not applicable to searches conducted after 31st May, 20 3, but provisions of s. 132 of IT Act are continuing on statute implying thereby that provisions of s. 153A of Act are only applicable in case valid search is conducted against assessee under s. 132 of Act. Accordingly, we declare assessments made against assessee under provisions of s. 143(3) r/w s. 153A of IT Act are null and void and direct AO to cancel same. Thus, issue related to validity of search raised by assessee is allowed. 25. In view of our decision with regard to validity of search, we are not adjudicating upon issues relating to merits of case. 2 6 . In result, all five appeals filed by assessee are partly allowed. *** J.M. TRADING CORPN. v. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX