9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (12) TMI 1241X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se of flats/ shops were made by the assessee and payment of on-money was made by him to the builder. Thereafter certain inquiries were carried out from the assessee u/s 133(6) by way of notice issued on u/s.133(6). Further letters were also issued. However, notice u/s 158BD was issued to the assessee on 10.06.2004. In the impugned order, the ld. CIT(A) upheld the legality of action u/s 158BD. HELD THAT:- We following the decision of Tribunal in the case of Vimal Vadilal Shah,[ 2010 (5) TMI 889 - ITAT AHMEDABAD] quash the block assessment framed on the ground that notice u/s158BD, which was issued long after completion of assessment in the case of person searched i.e. Ohm Developers. - Shri T.K. Sharma, J.M. And Shri A.N. Pahuja, A.M ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hed. It was also contended that though there is no time limit for issue of notice under section 158BD yet the Courts have held that that same must be issued within a reasonable time. In the case of the assessee the notice was issued after a period of four years and nine months from the date of search. Therefore, the entire assessment was bad in law. In support of this, reliance was placed on the decision of the ITAT, Hyderabad Bench in the case of P. Mahender Reddy vs.- DCIT [2005] 2 SOT 696 and the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Khandubhai Vasanji Desai vs.- DCIT 236 ITR 73. Before the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), it was also contended that no material was found from the possession of the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned CIT (Appeals) has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in assuming jurisdiction u/s. 158BD of the I.T. Act. (2) On the facts and in circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned CIT(Appeals) has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in making addition of ₹ 2,25,000/- on account of undisclosed investment in immovable property. (3) It is, therefore, prayed that above addition made by Assessing Officer and confirmed by CIT (Appeals) may please be deleted. 6. At the time of hearing before us, on behalf of assessee Shri Rasesh Shah, ld. counsel appeared and contended tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uiries were carried out from the assessee under section 133(6) of the Act by way of notice issued on u/s. 133(6). Further letters were also issued. However, notice under section 158BD was issued to the assessee on 10.06.2004. In the impugned order, the ld. CIT(A) upheld the legality of action under section 158BD of the Act. 9. It is pertinent to note that in the case of ACIT, Circle-3, Surat vs.- Vimal Vadilal Shah, Surat and vice-versa and others of ITAT, Ahmedabad (Camp at Surat) in IT(SS)A. Nos. 10 28/AHD/2008 (supra) relied by the ld. counsel of the assessee, on identical facts, we have quashed the block assessment vide decision dated 21.05.2010 for the reasons that notice issued under section 158BD of the Act was invalid because ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... IT in IT(SS)A. No. 104/Ahd/2009 ITAT Ahmedabad D Bench pronounced on 18-12-2009, it was held, following the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Manish Maheshwari v. ACIT (2007) 289 ITR 341 (SC) and Manoj Agarwal (supra) that if the assessment u/s. 158BC of the Act in the case of person searched (Ohm Developers) was completed on 30-11-2001 then issuing notice U/S.158BD of the Act on 29-03-2006 against assessee is barred by limitation. Similar view was taken by the ITAT Ahmedabad Bench in IT(SS)A No.25/Ahd/2007 in the case of Adil Parvez Randeria v. ACIT, CC-3(1) Surat pronounced on 01-09-2008- Following these decisions we hold that the block assessment framed in case of all the above assessee are not legally valid and ther ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
