9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Validity of block assessment order passed under s. 158BC of the IT Act due to absence of search warrant in the name of the assessee and failure to provide notice under s. 158BD. Detailed Analysis: The assessee appealed against the block assessment order for the financial years 1986-87 to 1995-96, arguing that the order was invalid as there was no search warrant in their name, and no notice under s. 158BD was served. The Authorized Representative contended that the search warrants were only in the names of specific individuals, not the assessee, and therefore, the assessment under s. 158BC was not lawful. They referenced previous Tribunal decisions to support their argument, emphasizing the necessity of compliance with s. 158BD for assessments against non-searched persons. The Departmental Representative defended the assessment, suggesting that the warrants in the partners' names should be considered as applicable to the firm. The Tribunal noted the discrepancy between the provisions of s. 158BC and s. 158BD, highlighting that the assessment against a non-searched person must adhere to the latter. Citing previous Tribunal rulings, the Tribunal concluded that the assessment against the assessee was not valid under the Act due to non-compliance with s. 158BD, thus quashing the block assessment order. Outcome: The Tribunal allowed the appeal, quashing the block assessment order against the assessee as it was deemed invalid under the provisions of the Act. The decision was based on the failure to follow the procedure outlined in s. 158BD for assessments involving non-searched persons, as established by previous Tribunal judgments. The Tribunal did not address other grounds of appeal, as the primary issue of the assessment's validity rendered further considerations unnecessary.
|
