Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2014 (11) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (11) TMI 943 - HC - Income TaxApplication of section 254(2) Income remains undisclosed or not - Bar of limitation u/s 158BD - Whether the Tribunal is right in entertaining and allowing the application filed by the assessee u/s 254(2) and holding that amount of ₹ 13,62,865/- was not undisclosed income and further directing the AO to assess the amount while framing regular assessment for the AY 1995-96 and whether inclusion of proposed amount as undisclosed income for the block period is barred by Explanation (b) below sub-section (2) of Section 158BA read with section 139 (5) Held that:- The assessee had filed return of income for AY 1995-96 showing total income at ₹ 101792 - Later on the assessee filed a revised return showing income of ₹ 14,64,657/- on 16.01.1996 including capital gain taking the sale price of land at ₹ 1821101 The Tribunal was rightly of the view that the Block period for the purpose of assessment has been taken as the period ending 5-1-1996 which is the date of search in the case of Shri B.B. Solanki (father of the assessee) and the assessee. The seized paper did contain reference to plots of land belonging to the assessee in relation to which cheque payments were received by the assessee and accounted for in his return filed in the normal course of business, but there were also other notations on the seized paper which points to the transfer/payment of ₹ 45 lacs cash, may be form the purchasers to Shri. Vijay C. Shah or to the assessee and as such the AO was justified in issuing notice u/s 158BD to the assesee on the basis of information which came into his possession consequent to the search and seizure operation in the case of Shri Vijay C. shah whose premises were searched on 22-10-1995 - the order u/s 158BD has also passed on 29- 1-1998 i.e. within one year from the date service of the notice u/s. 158, it is within the limitation provided in the Act and as such cannot be held to be time barred the order of the Tribunal is upheld Decided against revenue.
|