TMI Blog2001 (12) TMI 47X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ril 1, 1997, to March 31, 2000, of all the customers of the bank as mentioned in the said notice. In all other writ appeals, the respondents have issued notice to the appellant-bank to furnish information for the period from April 1, 1998, to March 31, 1999, in respect of the term depositors who have held cumulative balance of Rs. 50,000 and above during the said period in the pro forma mentioned in the said notice. It is stated in the said notice that such enquiry is necessary for widening the tax base and unearthing black money and initiating proceedings in such cases. The aforesaid notices are issued under section 133(6) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short "the Act"). The learned single judge considering the rival contentions, the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cific amount regarding repayment of loan and relevant requirement shown, the respondents are not entitled to seek for information, if the deposit relates to Rs. 50,000 or more. Learned counsel also submits that various safeguards have been made in the Act itself and in view of section 139A and rules 114B and 114C, the assessee has to comply with and for non-compliance the Department can initiate enquiry as per law and therefore issuance of notice is bad. The learned single judge wrongly relied on the earlier decision in South Canara District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd.'s case [2000] 246 ITR 200 (Karn) and has not considered properly the decisions of the Bombay High Court in D.B.S. Financial Services Pvt. Ltd.'s case [1994] 207 ITR 1077, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ior to the amendment and in those cases no permission was taken. He also submitted that in the Calcutta case there is a mention about the amended act, but since no permission was accorded, the issuance of notice was set aside and that case will not be helpful and the learned single judge has rightly distinguished those cases and not interfered in the writ petitions. Learned counsel for the Income-tax Department further submits that the impugned notice issued is in accordance with law and as per section 133(6) of the Act and this court in Writ Petition No. 38360 of 1999 disposed of on November 3, 1999, has considered the same issue and held that the authorities have the power to seek such information under section 133(6) of the Act. The same ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the concerned authority mentioned in the section can ask any person including a banking company to furnish information in relation to such points or matters or to furnish statements of account and affairs verified in the manner specified by the authorities mentioned in the said section and giving information in relation to such points or matters as in the opinion of the concerned authority will be useful or relevant to any enquiry or proceeding. In the aforesaid section, the word "enquiry" has been inserted by the Finance Act of 1995 with effect from July 1, 1995. Prior to the amendment when similar notices were issued calling for information without any proceeding pending under the Act, in the aforesaid decisions of the Bombay and Calc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s are bad and the respondents have no power to make such roving enquiry. This argument proceeds on the assumption the enquiry means a specific case against an assessee. The word enquiry has been defined in Chamber's 20th Dictionary as "to ask a question ; to make an investigation ; eager to acquire information; to ask, to seek, to make an examination". Therefore, as is clear from the section itself the whole object of issuing such notice is to collect information which is useful for or relevant to an enquiry for widening the tax base and to unearth black money and to initiate proceedings in such cases. Therefore, only on the basis of information collected and after examination if the authorities find evasion of tax or accumulation of unac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ry" should be read as "pending enquiry" and unless there is some pending enquiry the authorities cannot invoke section 133(6). As already discussed, a perusal of the Act reveals that any information which is useful can be called for. So according to us enquiry includes collection of information before proceeding with an enquiry. As the Bombay High Court and the Calcutta High Court cases were prior to the amendment and no permission was taken, the argument that even the Calcutta High Court has observed the amendment made is not helpful. In the present case now prior approval has been taken. The argument of learned counsel that enquiry must be pending is also not tenable on this ground also that as per the proviso to the amendment, prior perm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
