9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (11) TMI 702X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... i Manoj Aggarwal on 30th Aug., 2000. According to the AO, during the course of search, documentary evidence indicating the fact that Shri Manoj Aggarwal was giving bogus accommodation entries to various persons was found. The AO who has assessed Shri Manoj Aggarwal passed an information to the AO of the present assessee on 15th July, 2003 indicating the fact that assessee is one of the mediators who has played a crucial role in providing accommodation entries to various entities and individuals from Shri Manoj Aggarwal. Hence he deserves to be assessed under s. 158BD of the Act. The AO accordingly had issued notice under s. 158BD on 31st March, 2004. In response to this notice, the assessee has filed return of income for the block period on 27th May, 2004 declaring nil income. The learned AO had issued notices under s. 143(2)/142(1) of the Act. After hearing the assessee, he has determined the undisclosed income at ₹ 3,52,25,105. On appeal, learned CIT(A) observed that only commission income earned by the assessee in helping Shri Manoj Aggarwal for giving accommodation entry is to be assessed in the hands of the assessee. In this way, the commission income on the total transa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 247 ITR 821 (SC). Referring to p. 826, he pointed out that the Courts while construing Revenue Acts should give a fair and reasonable construction to the language of statute without leaning to one side or the other. He further pointed out that the Hon ble Supreme Court has observed that the Courts must adhere to the words of the statute and the so-called equitable construction of those words of the statute is not permissible. The task of the Court is to construe the provisions of the taxing enactments according to the ordinary and natural meaning of the language used and then to apply that meaning to the facts of the case. With regard to the second fold of submission, he pointed out that satisfaction was recorded by the AO of Manoj Aggarwal while passing order under s. 158BC of the Act. He produced one office note before us and contended that this office note should be construed as satisfaction. According to the learned Departmental Representative the Act does not provide the manner and the proforma in which such satisfaction ought to have been recorded by the AO. If an assessee is able to understand the charges against him then it would be sufficient to say that a proper satisfac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce on such person to whom the books of account etc. relate requiring him to furnish a block return under s. 158BC. The Gujarat High Court was concerned with the constitutional validity of s. 158BD of the Act and one of the contentions was expressed in the form of an apprehension that a notice under s. 158BD can be issued by the AO in the case of the other person (other than the person who was searched) at any time. While repelling this contention and putting at rest the apprehension that it is ill-founded, the Gujarat High Court held that the notice under s. 158BD has to be issued within a reasonable period from the date of the search itself and it was pointed out, taking cue from s. 132(9A), that it should be done within 15 days of the seizure. The obvious implication is that the satisfaction that the income reflected in the seized material belongs to some person other than the person searched should also be reached within the aforesaid period of 15 days so that the same can be transmitted along with the books of account, documents, etc. seized during the search. The period of 15 days has been amended to 60 days by the Finance Act, 2002, w.e.f. 1st June, 2002. It is noteworthy tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r/w s. 158BC of the Act. 7. As far as the contentions of the learned Departmental Representative is concerned that no time-limit is provided under s. 158BD of the Act for issuance of notice, we are of the opinion that the Tribunal in the case of Radhey Shyam Bansal (supra) has considered all these aspects. It found that no doubt such time-limit is not provided in the section but notice ought to have been issued in a reasonable time. In that process, Tribunal has considered the other machinery provisions available in the Act as well as the decision of Hon ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Khandubhai Vasanji Desai vs. Dy. CIT (1998) 150 CTR (Guj) 577 : (1999) 236 ITR 73 (Guj). The issue in the case of Vikrant Tyres Ltd. (supra) is altogether on different footings. In that case, assessment orders were served upon the assessee along with the demand notice, the assessee complied with the demands by paying the taxes due within time. It challenged the addition before the learned first appellate authority who allowed its appeal, however, Hon ble High Court has restored the assessment order and confirmed the addition. Meanwhile, the taxes paid by the assessee have been refunded to i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
