Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Commissioner of Income Tax-20 (Erstwhile CIT-XII) Versus Smt. Priyanka Singhania

2015 (9) TMI 237 - DELHI HIGH COURT

Validity of assessment u/s 153A - Whether any proceedings at all could have been initiated against the Assessee/respondent under Section 153A without there being a search warrant in her name issued in terms of Section 132 read with Rule 112 of the Income Tax Rules 1962 and Form 45 thereof? - Held that:- It is evident from Rule 112 read with Form 45 that the search warrant has to be issued in the name of the person. The search warrant will also have to indicate the place of search. The documents .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of the search warrant issued in the name of the father of the Respondent and not the Respondent. As already noted, the Revenue has been unable to produce till date any record to show that there was any search warrant issued in the name of the Respondent.

Respondentís contention is correct that with the Department not having proceeded to search the locker No. 111 on 23rd June 2006 itself and having completed the search proceedings on that date by 5.15 pm, if it thereafter proposed to .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rant in her name. Consequently, the Court is satisfied that apart from other reasons mentioned in the impugned order of the ITAT, the proceedings under Section 153A against the Respondent was itself without the authority of law. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA 163/2015 - Dated:- 2-9-2015 - S. Muralidhar And Vibhu Bakhru, JJ. For the Appellant : Ms. Suruchi Aggarwal, Senior Standing Counsel with Ms. Lakshmi Gurung, Advocate. For the Respondent : Mr. Arvind Kumar, Advocate. ORDER 1. This ap .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of the panchnama drawn on the date of the search i.e.23rd June 2006. It shows that the warrant was issued in the name of Mr. Raj Kumar Singhania and the place to be searched indicated as 104, New Rajdhani Enclave, Delhi. The search appears to have commenced at 8.15 am and concluded at 5.15 pm on that very date. Inter alia, during the course of the search, certain keys of bank lockers were found in the said residential premises. One of the keys pertained to locker No.111, Canara Bank, Laxmi Nagar .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ania and Priyanka Singhania, locker No. 111, Canara Bank, Laxmi Nagar, Delhi." The panchnama, drawn contains the signatures of the Respondent with the date of 7th July 2006, stating that she has received a copy thereof along with key of the locker which by then had been opened. It is also stated in page No.13 of the panchnama in an endorsement across the page that locker found vacant/empty . Therefore, nothing was found in the locker belonging to the Respondent. It was stated in para 2 of t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

earch warrant in the name of the Respondent then the question of there being any proceedings at all against her under Section 153A of the Act would not arise. 5. It is seen from the order of both Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [ CIT (A) ] and the ITAT that this issue was specifically raised by the Assessee throughout the proceedings. It was for this reason that on the previous date i.e. 10th August 2015, this Court passed the following order: 1. The contention of the learned counsel for th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

oduced. 3. The Appellant is directed to produce the relevant original files for perusal of the Court on the next date of hearing. 6. Ms. Suruchi Aggarwal, learned Senior Standing counsel for the Revenue, informs the Court that the file that has been brought today in the Court is the file containing the assessment proceedings and not the relevant file concerning the issuance of the search warrant. 7. It is seen that even on the first date of hearing i.e. 2nd March 2015, the Revenue had produced f .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Assessee shows that while there was search warrant in the name of Mr. Raj Kumar Singhania, the father of the Respondent, there was no separate search warrant in the name of the Respondent. The panchnama dated 7th July 2006 with reference to search of locker No. 111 of the Respondent, refers to the said proceedings being in continuation of the earlier search proceedings which took place on 23rd June 2006. The search proceedings on 23rd June 2006 was on the basis of the search warrant issued in t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version