TMI Blog2013 (3) TMI 71X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of this Court has held that after the amendment of the Act by insertion of Section 292 CC with retrospective effect from 1.4.1976, even if the authorization had been issued in the joint names of several persons, assessment in the individual names can be made. - Decided in favor of revenue. - Income Tax Appeal No. - 213 of 2011 - - - Dated:- 23-1-2013 - R.K. Agrawal And Ram Surat Ram (Maurya),JJ. Petitioner Counsel :- R. K. Upadhyaya ORDER The present appeal has been filed under Section 260 (A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') against the order dated 26.8.2010 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad (Lucknow Bench on tour) (hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal'). The Commi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ified in disregarding the provisions of section 153A which require proceedings to be initiated in case of persons searched u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act? 5. Whether the Hon'ble ITAT was justified in law in wrongly applying the ratio of judgment in the case of CIT vs. Smt. Vandana Verma as the facts and circumstances of the instant case are different from the facts and circumstances of the present case. The Tribunal having accepted in para 3 of the order, the fact that search has been conducted at the residential and other premises belonging to Sri Umesh Chandra and his brothers, etc. which is known as M/s. Maiku Lal Salik Ram group of cases could not have concluded that the assessment should be made in the name of A.O.P.? Briefly stat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... esh Chandra Kesarwani, Rakesh Chandra Kesarwani, Sri Vinod Chandra Kesarwani and Sri Pramod Chandra Kesarwani and as per the ratio laid down by this Court in the case of CIT vs. Smt. Vandana Verma, (2009) 2007 CTR Alld 388, the assessments should have been framed in the status of AOP/BOI only and not in the individual status of the assessee. The cross objections filed by the assessee were therefore not decided. We have heard Sri R.K. Upadhyay, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Revenue and Sri Sanjeev Singh appearing for the respondent assessee. We find that after the decision rendered by this court in the case of Smt. Vandana Verma (supra), the Parliament stepped in and made retrospective amendment by inserting Section 292 CC w.e. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
