9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (2) TMI 980X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ax (Appeals) was correct in holding that the assessment order passed under section 143(3)/158BC on July 14, 2011, has got barred by limitation on May 30, 2011, whereas in accordance with the proviso to section 158BE, Explanation 1 the block assessment order could have been passed up to July 16, 2011. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in deleting the addition without going into the merits of the case in respect of the addition of Rs. 3,90,970 on account of alleged suppression of profession charges. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as in law, the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in deleting the additi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... well as in law, the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in deleting the addition without going into the merits of the case in respect of the addition of Rs. 40,39,002 under section 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on account of unexplained gifts. 10. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as in law, the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in deleting the addition without going into the merits of the case in respect of the addition of Rs. 19,01,678 on account of unexplained investment deposit in bank account. 11. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as in law, the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in deleting the addition without going into ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order in question was barred by limitation ignoring the amended procedure. 6. The learned authorised representative, on the other hand, placed reliance on the first appellate order and reiterated the submissions made before the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). He submitted that Explanation 1 to section 158BE(2) of the Act was initially introduced in 1996 by way of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1996, and later on it was amended in 1998. On both these occasions, it was specifically provided that the amendments are retrospective and shall be applicable from July 1, 1995. Hence, it cannot be said that the amendment brought in with effect from June 1, 2002, by way of new Explanation 1 will be applicable with retrospective effect, i.e. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f calculation of limitation for completing the block assessment proceeding, the period with effect from the date of stay order till the appearance of the Commissioner (assessee) was directed to be excluded. The Assessing Officer had passed the order on July 24, 2011, much beyond the time permitted by the hon'ble High Court, thus, the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) had rightly held that the order dated July 14, 2011, was barred by limitation. He contended that limitation for completing the assessment is applicable as the law stands on the date on which the limitation starts. 8. Considering the above submission, we find that in the present case, search and seizure operation under section 132 of the Act was carried out on Ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessment order on July 14, 2011. Now, we have to examine as to whether the learned Commissioner of Income- tax (Appeals) was justified in treating this assessment order as time barred in view of the provisions laid down under section 158BE of the Act. Explanation 1 to section 158BC of the Act takes care of such situation where the assessment proceedings have been stayed by any court. In the present case, as discussed above, the hon'ble High Court, vide order dated March 17, 2004, had been pleased to stay the Assessing Officer from passing final order during the pendency of the writ petition. The hon'ble High Court while writing so had made it clear that in the meantime the block assessment proceedings may go on but no final or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nto force of the amendment, the period of limitation will apply and not otherwise. In this regard, we also find substance in the contention of the learned authorised representative that when Explanation 1 to section 158BE was initially introduced in 1996 by way of Finance (No. 2) Act, 1996, and later on it was amended in 1998, it was specifically provided on both the occasions that the amendments are retrospective and shall be applicable from July 1, 1995, but no such retrospective effect has been mentioned by the Legislature while bringing the amendment by way of insertion of new Explanation 1 to this section with effect from June 1, 2002. Undisputedly, in the present case of the assessee, the search was conducted on March 19, 2002, and no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
