TMI Blog2009 (11) TMI 916X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the amendments - HELD THAT:- As in view of the consistent judgments of this Court and the decision of the Supreme Court, we do not think there is any scope for interference with the judgments of the learned Single Judges upholding the validity of notices after overruling the contentions raised by the appellants. Whether the general notice calling for cash particulars including deposits of various depositors above ₹ 1 lakh is issued by the concerned officer with the prior approval of the Director or the CIT, as the case may be? - HELD THAT:- In the first place, we feel that the notices do not pertain to loans advanced by societies and even renewals granted by them by closing the old loans against fresh loans. In our view, parti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 377; 1 lakh with details of account holder/deposit holder in the format prepared by the authority issuing the notices. The societies challenged the validity of the notices before this Court by filing writ petitions. Two learned Single Judges have written separate judgments upholding the validity of the notices issued under s. 133(6) of the Act, against which writ appeals are filed. In the connected writ petitions, the societies are challenging similar notices issued to them under the same provision of the Act. 2. We have heard various counsel appearing for the appellants/ petitioners and standing counsel appearing for the respondents. Same contentions raised by the appellants/petitioners were first decided by one of us, (C.N. Ramachandra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 17 : (2003) 263 ITR 161 (Ker). In view of the decisions above referred, the questions raised are no longer res integra. Even though counsel for the appellants/petitioners referred to judgment of the Bombay High Court in D.B.S. financial Services (P) Ltd. v. Smt M. George, Second ITO (1993) 115 CTR (Bom) 318 : (1994) 207 ITR 1077 (Bom) and the judgment of the Calcutta High Court in Grindlays Bank Ltd. v. ITO (1999) 151 CTR (Cal) 614 : (1998) 231 ITR 612 (Cal), we notice that those decisions are rendered on s. 133(6) prior to its amendment in 1995. In any case, in view of the consistent judgments of this Court and the decision of the Supreme Court, we do not think there is any scope for interference with the judgments of the learned Single Ju ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... peals and writ petitions upholding the judgments of the learned Single Judges and the impugned notices issued and produced in the fresh writ petitions filed. 4. Counsel for the appellants/petitioners submitted before us their problems in regard to collection and furnishing of details pertaining to three years within a short time. In the first place, we feel that the notices do not pertain to loans advanced by societies and even renewals granted by them by closing the old loans against fresh loans. In our view, particulars of the transactions called for are cash transactions above ₹ 1 lakh and deposit amount of ₹ 1 lakh and above, the details of which the appellants/petitioners are liable to furnish. We therefore extend the ti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
