TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 1236X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he block assessment in the case of searched person i.e. M/s. Tips Industries Ltd., was completed on 28.9.2001. The Hon'ble Supreme Court says that the notice u/s. 158BD should be immediately issued after the completion of the assessment of the searched person, but in this case the notice was issued and served on 5.9.2005, almost 4 years after the date of the completion of the assessment of the searched parties. In our considered opinion, this service of notice cannot be considered to be immediately after the completion of the assessment of the searched person and is contrary to the observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court (supra). Also see BHARAT BHUSHAN JAIN AND OTHERS case [2015 (1) TMI 705 - DELHI HIGH COURT] wherein a delay ranging ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the time limit for completion of assessment u/s. 158BD of the I.T. Act after issue of notice. 3. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that a search u/s. 132 of the Act was conducted on 27.7.1999. During the course of the search operations, certain loose papers were found which contained alleged transactions between the assessee and M/s. Tips Industries Ltd. Such incriminating documents were found from the residence of Shri Ramesh Taurani. On the basis of the entries found on the seized materials in the case of M/s. Tips Industries Ltd (searched party) a satisfaction was recorded about the alleged transactions between M/s. Tips Industries Ltd., and the assessee, therefore it was a fit case for the application of provisions of Sec. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... isfaction Note to the AO of the assessee. Drawing support from the decision of the Special Bench of the Tribunal, Delhi (supra), the Ld. CIT(A) was convinced that in the case of the assessee the delay was more than the delay in the case of Manoj Aggarwal (supra) and concluded by holding that the Satisfaction Note is belated and based on such Satisfaction Note, the AO could not have issued notice u/s. 158BD of the Act and consequently the entire proceedings are ab initio void and annulled the assessment. The assessment order was accordingly annulled. 5. Aggrieved by this, the Revenue is before us. 6. The Ld. Departmental Representative strongly submitted that there is no period of limitation prescribed under the Act for the issuance of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ficer of the searched party. 9. With this undisputed factual matrix all that we have to consider is whether the issuance of this note can be treated as having been served within the reasonable period of time. No doubt, there is no provision in the Act to prescribe the period of limitation for the service of notice u/s. 158BD of the Act. 9.1. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs Calcutta Knitwears 362 ITR 673 has made a strong observation that the Revenue has to be vigilant in issuing notice to the third party u/s. 158BD immediately after the completion of assessment of the searched person. The facts of the case discussed hereinabove defy the observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court mentioned hereinabove. 9.2. As ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
