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

Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2001 (2) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2001 (2) TMI 127 - HC - Income Tax

Issues Involved:
The appeal questions whether the genuineness of a loan accounted for in regular books can be considered in block assessment. The key issues include the treatment of a loan obtained from a limited company during block assessment, the authority's dissatisfaction with the explanation provided, and the challenge to the assessment order before the Tribunal.

Judgment Details:

Issue 1: Treatment of Loan in Block Assessment
The Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer had the power under section 158BA of the Income-tax Act, 1961 to tax the loan amount during block assessment, regardless of when the material was found. The appellant challenged this decision under section 260A of the Act.

Issue 2: Assessing Officer's Entitlement to Question Loan
The court considered whether the Assessing Officer could question a loan subject to regular assessment during block assessment and whether such questioning could lead to adverse decisions based on creditworthiness issues.

Judgment Analysis:
The court analyzed the Explanation inserted by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1998 in section 158BA(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Explanation clarified that block assessment is separate from regular assessment, and undisclosed income assessed in block assessment should not be included in regular assessment.

Conclusion:
The court concluded that the Assessing Officer was not entitled to question the loan during block assessment if it was already part of regular assessment. The Tribunal's decision upholding the taxation of the loan as undisclosed income was deemed erroneous. The appeal was allowed, with both judges concurring on the decision.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates