9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (11) TMI 728X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s issued under Section 133(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'), respectively. 4. Since the appellant-assessee(s) herein are similarly placed societies registered under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act engaged in banking business, for brevity and convenience of reference, we would confine the discussion to factual matrix in the lead case. The appellant- assessee before us is a Service Co-operative Rural Bank. The Income Tax Officer (CIB), Calicut issued a notice bearing F.No. ITO (CIB)/Clt/2008-09 to the assessee under Section 133(6) of the Act calling for general information regarding details of all persons (whether resident or non- resident) who have made (a) cash transactions (remittance, transfer, etc.) of Rs. 1,00,000/- and above in any account and/or (b) time deposits (FDs, RDs, TDs, etc.) of Rs. 1,00,000/- or above for the period of three years between 01.04.2005 and 31.03.2008, dated 02.02.2009. It was expressly stated therein that failure to furnish the aforesaid information would attract penal consequences. The assessee objected to the said notice on grounds, inter alia, that such notice seeking for information which is unrelated to any existing or p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the notice to you calling for the details of transactions/ deposits above Rs.1 lakh made by customers in your institution. It is hereby pointed out that I am well within my authority calling for information from you and have not exceeded my powers. Further, the Hon'ble High Court in its above judgment has stated that - '.......If co-operative banks and co-operative societies are allowed to maintain deposits beyond the scrutiny of the Income Tax Department, then the societies will become safe havens for hoarding back money in the country which is opposed to public policy. Besides this, the statutory authorities vested with the responsibility to levy tax on income will be prevented from achieving their objective and that will defeat the very purpose of the Income Tax Act....' 5. The assessee, aggrieved by the aforesaid, filed Writ Petition No. 9737 of 2009 before the High Court challenging the notice dated 02.02.2009. The learned Single Judge has discussed the case of the assessee including the submissions made by the parties in extenso and reached the conclusion that the impugned notice was validly issued under the provisions of the Act and therefore, dismissed the said petition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed, respectively. Further, Finance Act, 2011 inserted the third proviso with effect from 01.06.2011. The amended Section 133(6) reads as under: "Section 133 - Power to call for information: The Assessing Officer, the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals), the Joint Commissioner or the Commissioner (Appeals) may, for the purposes of this Act, (6) require any person, including a banking company or any officer thereof, to furnish information in relation to such points or matters, or to furnish statements of accounts and affairs verified in the manner specified by the Assessing Officer, the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals), the 1[Joint Commissioner] or the Commissioner (Appeals), giving information in relation to such points or matters as, in the opinion of the Assessing Officer, the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals), the Joint Commissioner or the Commissioner (Appeals), will be useful for, or relevant to, any enquiry or proceeding under this Act: Provided that the powers referred to in clause (6), may also be exercised by the Director General, the Chief Commissioner, the Director and the Commissioner. Provided further that the power in respect of an inquiry, in a case where no proceeding is pending ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... an income-tax authority below the rank of Director or Commissioner can exercise this power in respect of an inquiry in a case where no proceeding is pending, only with the prior approval of the Director or the Commissioner." [Emphasis supplied] 13. Keeping in view the aforesaid, we would now refer to the contentions of the learned counsel for the parties. It is the case of the assessee that though this Court in Karnataka Bank case (supra) has considered the powers of respondent-authorities to issue notice under Section 133(6) but has not considered as to whether the said provision clothes the respondent-authorities with any power for conducting a roving or fishing enquiry into the affairs of the assessee or regarding the deposits made by its customers. Further, that this Court has considered only "case specific" or "area specific" information sought under Section 133(6). Learned Counsel for the assessee would therefore submit that the High Court has erred by not appreciating the decision of this Court in Karnataka Bank case (supra) and erroneously dismissed the case of similarly placed banks. 14. Au contraire learned Solicitor General for the Assessing Authority, would support ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7. Since the language of the Section 133(6) is wholly unambiguous and clear, reliance on interpretation of statutes would not be necessary. Before the introduction of amendment to Section 133(6) in 1995, the Act only provided for issuance of notice in case of pending proceedings. As a consequence of the said amendment, the scope of Section 133(6) was expanded to include issuance of notice for the purposes of enquiry. The object of the amendment of section 133(6) by the Finance Act, 1995 (Act 22 of 1995) as explained by the CBDT in its circular shows that the legislative intention was to give wide powers to the officers, of course with the permission of the CIT or the Director of Investigation to gather general particulars in the nature of survey and store those details in the computer so that the data so collected can be made use of for checking evasion of tax effectively. The assessing authorities are now empowered to issue such notice calling for general information for the purposes of any enquiry in both cases: (a) where a proceeding is pending and (b) where proceeding is not pending against the assessee. However in the latter case, the assessing authority must obtain the prior ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hold deposits above a particular sum is certainly permissible. 20. In the instant case, by the impugned notice the assessing authority sought for information in respect of its customers which have cash transactions or deposits of Rs. 1,00,000/- or above for a period of three years, without reference to any proceeding or enquiry pending before any authority under the Act. Admittedly, in the present case notice was issued only after obtaining approval of the Commissioner of Income Tax, Cochin. In light of the aforesaid, we are of the considered opinion that the Assessing Authority has not erred in issuing the notice to the assessee- financial institution requiring it to furnish information regarding the account holder with cash transactions or deposits of more than Rs. 1,00,000/-. 21. Therefore, we hold that the Division Bench of the High Court was justified in its conclusion that for such enquiry under Section 133(6) the notice could be validly issued by the Assessing Authority. 22. In view of the above, the appeal requires to be dismissed and accordingly, stands dismissed. In C.A.NO.7487-7517 OF 2013 @ S.L.P.(C)No.3994-4024 OF 2010 WITH C.A.NO.7518-32 OF 2013 @S.L.P.(C)No.5194 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
