9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (10) TMI 92X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... section 158BD/143(3)/158BG of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short hereafter referred to as the Act) vis-a-vis the respondent herein. 02. We have heard Mr. S Sarma, learned Counsel for the Revenue and Mr. GN Sahewalla, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. P Deka, Advocate for the respondent. 03. Following a search and seizure operation under section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short hereinafter referred to as the Act) conducted in the business and residential premises of the assessee, Partha Sarathi Dey (since deceased) and his successors in interest on 08.12.1999 a notice under section 158BC was issued on 07.06.2000 to the legal representatives of the deceased abovenamed, which was received by them, according to the Revenue, on 26.06. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce was ordered to be issued to the respondent, as the legal representative of Lt. Partha Sarathi Dey. According to the revenue, this notice was received by the respondent-Assessee on 24.12.2001, whereupon, the assessment was validly made on 31.12.2003. 05. Being aggrieved by this assessment, the respondent unsuccessfully preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) Shillong, which dismissed the same on 08.11.2006. The learned Tribunal, however, by the judgment and order impugned herein, interfered with the assessment order on the ground that in terms of section 158BE (2) (a) or (b), the block assessment in the case in hand ought to have been completed within 31.12.2002 and, thus, the assessment order dated 31.12.2003 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... obligatorily completed by 31.12.2002 and in that view of the matter, the assessment order dated 31.12.2003 had been rightly held to be barred by time by the learned Tribunal. Without prejudice to this plea, the learned Senior Counsel has further insisted that in any view of the matter, the proceedings of the search and seizure conducted on the basis of a warrant issued against a dead man were void ab initio and, thus all consequential steps towards the assessment were non est. 08. The pleaded facts and the arguments advanced have been duly considered by us. That, at the first instance, the search for the aforementioned block period had been conducted on the basis of a warrant issued in the name of Sri Partha Sarathi Dey, who was dead on th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on facts. Whereas, in C&C Construction (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Supra), the proposition of law is that an issue neither raised nor decided by the learned Tribunal cannot be a subject matter of appeal under section 260 A before the High Court, in Sanjay Kumar Modi (Supra), the search and seizure was admittedly conducted on the premises of a joint family. The contextual facts therein disclosed that the name of the petitioner was not in the search warrant and, therefore, the search vis-a-vis him was held to be invalid. In spite of this lacuna, the search vis-a-vis the other co-noticees residing in the premises were sustained with the conclusion that the entire proceedings of the search thus could not be held to be invalid. Thi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
