Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1984 (6) TMI 23

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the Act empowers the officers specified therein to authorise any ITO or Assistant Director of Inspection to search the premises, etc., and seize the books of account or other relevant material therefrom, if he believes that a person summoned to produce the books has failed to do so. For the purpose of this case, it is unnecessary to examine or set out the ingredients or features of sub-s. (1) in any detail. The pro visions relevant herein are sub-ss. (8) and (10), which read as follows : " (8) The books of account or other documents seized under sub-section (1) or sub-section (1A) shall not be retained by the authorised officer for a period exceeding one hundred and eighty days from the date of the seizure unless the reasons for retainin .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... . The order reads as follows: GOVERNMENT OF INDIA OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, KARNATAKA (CENTRAL), BANGALORE. C. No. 6(14) CIT(C)/79-80D/25-2-1980. PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, KARNATAKA (CENTRAL), BANGALORE. Sri S. T. Tirumalachari, Commissioner of Income-tax, Karnataka (Central), Bangalore. Subject : Retention of books and documents seized under section 132 of the I.T. Act, 1961-M/s. Hyderabad Vanaspathi Ltd., Hyderabad. ORDER UNDER SECTION 132(8) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961. Sanction is hereby accorded to the Income-tax Officer, Central Circle-1, Hyderabad, for the retention of the books and documents seized on 8-9-1978 from the following residential/business premises by the authorised of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... communicated, it is not possible for the petitioner to exercise the right conferred upon him by sub-s. (10) properly and effectively. He can submit his objections only if he knows the reasons for such approval. The communication of reasons is, therefore, necessary and obligatory the breach whereof renders the retention beyond 180 days illegal and unauthorised. In this case, the reasons recorded by the authorised officer, if any, were not communicated. We are inclined to agree with the learned counsel on both the counts. So far as the second contention urged by the counsel for the petitioner is concerned, it is fully supported by the decision of the Supreme Court in CIT v. Oriental Rubber Works [1984] 145 ITR 477, where it is held that .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s to be exercised on the subjective satisfaction of the specified officer: See Barium Chemicals Ltd. v. Company Law Board [1966] 36 Comp Cas 639 (SC) in this regard. The other check or the limitation upon the said power is the twin requirements contained in sub-s. (8). If the seized books are to be retained beyond ISO days, the authorised officer must record his reasons therefor and must obtain the approval of the Commissioner. Yet another safeguard to the citizen is the one contained in sub-s. (10), which confers a right of revision as it can be called upon the person aggrieved. He can submit his objections (to the reasons and approval) to the Board, which shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders. In this view of the matter, it .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... to hold that the requirement of recording reasons and according approval before the expiry of one hundred and eighty days is obligatory, is that holding otherwise would enable the authorities to defeat the object underlying the enactment and the rights of the citizens. All that they need do is to comply with the said requirements only when questioned in court. In other words, only when threatened with an order, they would comply with the said requirements, and plead that, since they have complied with the legal requirements at any rate before any order is passed by the court, the books cannot be directed to be returned. It is brought to our notice that the same conclusion has been arrived at by the Delhi High Court in Hanuman Pershad Gane .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates