TMI Blog2003 (1) TMI 713X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of companies, Indeo Airways Pvt. Ltd. and Sam Aviation Pvt. Ltd. All these companies operated chartered and cargo flights to Russia and CIS countries. Subsequent investigations revealed that various exporters were paying freight partly in cash which was not accounted for and partly by cheque which was shown in the books of account of both the parties. M/s Wadco Exports is one of such parties. 3. Search and seizure operations were carried out on 11-2-1999 at the business premises of M/s. Wadco Exports and at the residence of the Prop. Smt. Neena Wadhwa at 60, Sainik Farms, New Delhi. Notice under section 158BC was issued on 26-7-2000 requiring the assessee to furnish her return of total undisclosed income for the block period within 30 da ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s including the interest charged under section 158BFA(1) of the Income-tax Act. The learned CIT(A) upheld the order and rejected the legal grounds regarding the jurisdiction but allowed some relief in regard to the quantum of the undisclosed income determined by the Assessing Officer. 6. The assessee is still aggrieved and has come up in appeal before the Tribunal raising as many as 21 grounds. At the outset, the learned counsel of the assessee Shri C.S. Agarwal, took up ground No. 4 which reads as follows : 4. That without prejudice to the aforesaid and in the alternative, the learned CIT(A) - I has completely over looked that the impugned assessment made by an order dated 29-5-2001 is without jurisdiction, being by limitation as pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cer Shri R.K. Singh concluded the search on 11-2-1999. A copy of the Panchnama is placed at pages 96 to 99 of the paper book duly signed by the assessee and the authorized officer shri Rajiv Kr. Singh. A second Panchnama dated 11-2-1999 was also prepared in the case of M/s Wadco Exports by the authorized officers Shri A.P. Tuteja and Shri S.S. Mahajan, copy of which is placed at page 110. According to the Panchnama the search operation at the residential premises of the assessee was concluded on 11-2-1999 as per the Panchnama at page 96 and the search conducted at the business premises of M/s Wadco Exports was concluded on 12-2-1999 as per the Panchnama at page 110 of the paper book. 8. Again on 18-2-1999, another warrant of authorizatio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ory order and for this purpose the authorized officer also is not the same person. According to him the warrant of authorization was executed on 21-4-1999 and therefore, the assessment was to be completed by 30-4-2001. It is, therefore, incorrect to assume that the warrant of authorization was last executed on 21-5-1999 since on the aforesaid date, the locker which had been search and kept under prohibitory order was only opened and the prohibitory order released. Therefore, this operation does not extend the life of the warrant of authorization for the purpose of assessment of block period. Since the present assessment was completed on 29-5-2001, the same is beyond time and barred by limitation and is to be quashed. Reliance is placed on t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the assessee on the decision in the case of CIT v. Mrs. Sandhya P. Naik (supra), it is submitted that the said decision was not directly on the point. In that case, it was found by the Hon ble High Court that there was no warrant of authorization for search in the name of the Officer as he was not one of the authorized officers mentioned in the search warrant who removed the seal and made a further order under section 132(3) of the act releasing the silver vessels and articles etc. Since the facts of the present case are totally different, it is submitted that the said decision has no application to the facts of the case. It is, therefore, submitted that the order of the CIT(A) is liable to be upheld. 13. We have carefully considered t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ker No. 906 of ANZ Grindlays Bank. Shri Yogender Chaudhary and Shri R. Janardhan were the authorized officers, Shri Yogender Chaudhary revoked the order under section 132(3) of the Act. Since this warrant of authorization dated 21-5-1999 was only for revoking the prohibitory order under section 132(3) of the Act and the authorized officers are not the same officers, as per the original search warrant dated 11-2-1999, it is the claim of the assessee that the prohibitory order issued on 21-4-1999 could not extend the time limit under section 158BE of the Act. This contention is fully supported by the decision of the Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Mrs. Sandhya P. Naik (supra) wherein the Hon ble High Court held as follows : ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
