9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (2) TMI 21X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... come Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that assumption of jurisdiction under Section 158BD of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was not illegal, even though the mandatory requirement of recording "satisfaction" to the effect that undisclosed income belonged to the appellant was patently lacking on the face of record." 3. The filing of paper books is dispensed with. 4. The Revenue is aggrieved by an order dated 15 th February, 2007 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Delhi Bench "A" in I.T. (SS) A. No.26/Del/99 relevant for the block period 1 st July, 1987 to 20 th March, 1996. 5. A search was conducted on 20 th March, 1996 under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) at various ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iven to the effect that a notice should be issued to the Assessee under Section 142(1) of the Act. 9. The Assessing Officer rejected the objection raised by the Assessee but did not specifically deal with the contention urged that satisfaction ought to have been recorded in respect of initiating proceedings under Section 158-BD of the Act. 10. In the assessment order this contention raised by the Assessee has been specifically noted in the following words: "During the Block Assessments proceedings of M/s Ellora Mechanical Product (P) Ltd. the assessing officer found various incriminating documents related to New Delhi Auto Finance but the jurisdiction on this case was not with JCIT Spl. Range-15. The A.O. having jurisdi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bjected to search must record a note of satisfaction and reasons thereof. In the instant case it was submitted that no such note has been recorded. It was further submitted that such proceedings have not only to be initiated but also to be completed within a period of one year when search was conducted and in any case within a period of one year from the date of recording the reason of satisfaction. Thirdly, the jurisdiction over the assessee"s case lies with ACIT Company Circle 26(5). With regard to the legal issue regarding assumption of jurisdiction under sec. 158-BD, we do not find any merit in the contention of the learned AR as the Assessing officer having Jurisdiction over M/s Ellora Mechanical Product Pvt. Ltd. has intimated to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rified and signed in accordance with the provisions of Section 140 of the I.T. Act, 1961. Sd/- (D.V. SINGH) JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX SPECIAL RANGE-15, NEW DELHI. Recd. on 29.10.98 By Sh. J.B. Aggarwal." 14. Reliance was placed by learned counsel for the Assessee on Manish Maheshwari v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, [2007] 289 ITR 341 in support of his contention that the Assessing Officer must record his satisfaction that undisclosed income has been unearthed and also in support of his contention that the notice dated 26 th October, 1998 issued was completely vague. 15. It was contended by learned counsel for the Assessee that the Supreme Court has held in Manish Maheshwari that there are cer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssued the Assessee in that case was more or less similar to the notice dated 26 th October, 1998 issued to the Assessee in the present case. In the case of Manish Maheshwari the additional fact mentioned in the notice sent to the Assessee was that a search was conducted in the month of November, 1995. In so far as the present case is concerned, the Assessee has not been informed when the search was conducted. 18. Dealing with the contention regarding the vagueness of the notice in Manish Maheshwari the Supreme Court held as follows: "The only question which arises for our consideration is as to whether the notice dated February 6, 1996, satisfied the requirements of section 158BD of the Act. The said notice does not record any sa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... are drastic and draconian. The accounts of the Assessee may be re-opened for ten years and not only a legal presumption is raised against the Assessee but the burden shifts on the Assessee to show that it did not have any undisclosed income. Under these circumstances it is quite clear that the Revenue should not exercise its powers in a mechanical power but should be circumspect while taking action under the provisions of Chapter XIV-B of the Act. That has not happened in so far as the present case is concerned and, therefore, we have not hesitation in giving a finding in favour of the Assessee. 21. Learned counsel for the Revenue was unable to show any judgment of the Supreme Court which has taken a different view from that taken ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
