Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2015 (2) TMI 723

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rit petition praying for refund of the seized cash. The brief facts of the case are that on 2nd May, 1998, three persons namely Shri Mahesh Kumar Khandelwal, Shri Vijay Kumar Soni and Shri Phool Raj Singh were going on a Rickshaw to board the Prayagraj Express Train for going to Delhi. They were detained by the police and a total sum of Rs. 17,00,000/- was recovered from their possession. On interrogation, all the three persons stated that the money belongs to the assessee i.e. Anil Kumar Chaddha alias Guddu, who in reply to the query by the police stated that the cash belongs to the Firm M/s. Chaddha & Others. Finally, the matter was referred to the Income Tax Department, who has issued a notice under Section 158BC of the Act in the name .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ection 158BC and Section 158BD are machinery provisions which provides the procedure for block assessment. Hence, the assessment of undisclosed income cannot be set aside only on the ground that notice under Section 158BD should have been issued, even though Section 158BD contemplates the issuance of the notice only under Section 158BC. Learned Senior Counsel further submits that no objection was raised either before the Assessing Officer or the CIT(A), hence this objection cannot be taken for the first time before the Tribunal. It is also a submission of the learned Senior Counsel that Section 158BC provides for the procedure for block assessment of undisclosed income. On perusal of the said Section it is clear that 'any' search h .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... a Knitwears [2014] 362 ITR 673 (SC); (d) Khandubhai Vasanji Desai And Others vs. Deputy CIT and Another [1999] 236 ITR 73 (Guj.); and (e) CIT vs. V.K. Singhal and T.N. Vallinayagam JJ. [2001] 250 ITR 313 (Karnataka) Lastly, he made a request that the impugned order passed by the Tribunal may kindly be set aside and the order of the CIT(A) may kindly be restored. On the other hand, Shri Rishi Raj Kapoor, the learned counsel for the assessee has supported the order passed by the Tribunal. He submits that as per the language and provisions of Section 158BC of the Income Tax Act, where any search has been conducted under Section 132 or books of accounts, other documents or assets are requisitioned under Section 132A, in the case of any pers .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... here was no search warrant and requisition was not made in the name of the assessee, and in paragraph 7.1 of the impugned order, it is specifically held that : "In the instant case, no search was conducted in the hands of the assessee and even there was no requisition in the case of the assessee. Therefore the provisions of Section 158BC were not applicable." That revenue has not challenged this finding, hence the Tribunal being last fact finding authority, order of the Tribunal is legally right and valid and there is no question of law arises from the order of Tribunal. Hence, in view of the settled legal position, the proceedings under Section 158BC of the Income Tax Act, is illegal and invalid and the Tribunal has rightly held that the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... on was issued either in the name of the Firm or the assessee. In the instant case, at the best the seized amount might have been added in the hands of the assessee under Section 158BD. An opportunity was provided by this Hon'ble Court to the Department to produce the original records, but the Department expressed its inability to produce the records as stated by learned Senior Counsel of the Department. It may be mentioned that Section 158BC and Section 158BD are not identical, both have the different purposes. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Manish Maheshwari vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and Another [2007] 289 ITR 341 (SC) observed that before the provisions of Section 158BD of the Income Tax Act, 1961, are i .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates