TMI Blog2005 (9) TMI 64X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re, have to be reckoned from June 30, 2000 (being the end of the month in which the last panchnama was drawn) and would end on June 30, 2002. The assessment order, in the instant case, was however made on June 27, 2002, which was well within the outer limit of two years prescribed by law. The Tribunal was, in that view, justified in repelling the contention of the assessee that the order of assessment was beyond the period of limitation prescribed for the same. - - - - - Dated:- 22-9-2005 - Judge(s) : T. S. THAKUR., BADAR DURREZ AHMED. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by T.S. Thakur J.- These two appeals arise out of a common order, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi, whereby the block assessmen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d materials was also prayed for. The above writ petition came up before a Division Bench of this court and was dismissed by order dated May 6, 2002, on the ground that the same was barred by unexplained delay and laches. The petitioner then attempted to explain, in a letter addressed to the Assessing Officer, the reasons for surrendering Rs. 25 lakhs for taxation and reiterated its stand regarding the legality of the search proceedings. The Assessing Officer finalised the assessment proceedings and passed a block assessment order on June 27, 2002, bringing to tax an undisclosed income of Rs. 29,54,560, comprising the following: (i) Rs. 23,30,000, out of Rs. 25 lakhs, surrendered by the appellant in terms of his statement recorded on Jan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Act could not be examined in an appeal filed before the Tribunal and that the conversion of the survey operation into search by the Director of Investigation was valid and based on the satisfaction recorded by reference to the material available on record. The Tribunal further held that the block assessment order had been made within the time prescribed for the purpose. The present appeals, as already noticed earlier, call in question the correctness of the said view. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. Two substantial questions of law fall for our consideration. These are: (i) Whether the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the validity of the search proceedings could not be agitated in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssed on the ground of delay and laches only without touching the grounds of challenge urged by the petitioner-appellant, but it is equally true that directions regarding completion of the assessment proceedings expeditiously were issued by this court to the Assessing Officer in the following words: "In the notices dated January 22, 2002 the respondents have asked the petitioners to prepare a true and correct return of the total income including the undisclosed income, under the provisions of section 158BC of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Mr. Sharma, the learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the relevant information has already been submitted. In case some information remains to be submitted, the same will be subm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he second question formulated above. It was argued by learned counsel for the appellant-assessee that an order of assessment had to be made within a period of two years from the end of the month in which the search was concluded. The search in the instant case was, according to the appellant, concluded on February 2, 2000, which would mean that the assessment had to be completed within two years of February 28, 2000, i.e., on or before February 28, 2002. The assessment order was, on the contrary, passed on June 22, 2002, which was beyond the period stipulated. It was argued that by merely passing an order under section 132(3) of the Act in regard to the contents of the almirah and cupboard, the search could not be artificially prolonged. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ny person in whose case the warrant of authorisation has been issued. What is noteworthy is that the time-limit for the making of an order under section 158BC read with section 158BE(1) will start from the last of the panchnamas. In the instant case, the authorisation was issued on February 2, 2000. The search also started on the same date and continued till June 29, 2000, during which period various articles and documents were seized. The Tribunal has recorded a finding to the effect that there was no delay in executing the search inasmuch as various lockers and steel almirah and cupboard were required to be searched. There was, therefore, no artificial extension of the search proceedings as argued by the appellants. If that be so, the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
