9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 807X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eriod of one year and barred by limitation. Consequently, it was quashed. The contention of the department that last requisition was sent on 15.6.1999 and served upon CBI on 21.6.1999, so, case will fall within the ambit of Section 158BE (1) (a) of the Act and limitation will be of two years since the date of execution of the requisition is not acceptable because when first requisition dated 11.9.1995 was pending and no further material came to the notice of the department, so, there was no occasion for issuing second requisition on 15.6.1999. - Decided in favour of assessee - Income Tax Appeal No. 626 of 2007 - - - Dated:- 10-1-2017 - Hon'ble Bharati Sapru And Hon'ble Vinod Kumar Misra, JJ. For the Appellant : R.K.Upadhy ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tinuation of earlier authorization u/s 132A. The facts of the case are that a search and seizure operation was conducted by CBI on 03.05.1991 in the business and residential premises of Shri S.K. Jain and Shri J.K. Jain in connection with transfer of money through hawala and a diary MR-71/91 was seized. On the basis of this diary it was found that Shri Arif Mohd. Khan, husband of Smt. Reshma Arif, allegedly received ₹ 7,49,86,000/- as hawala money from Jain Brothers. The CBI carried out search operation at Locker No. L-885 of U I Vaults NDSE Part 1, New Delhi in the house of Sayyada (Nick family name of Smt. Reshma Arif). The jewellery worth ₹ 70,83,478/- and documents found and kept in Locker were inventorized and s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessment, recovery of tax and prosecution matter. The I.T. department also issued a warrant of authorization u/s 132A of the I.T. Act, 1961 on 15.06.1999 and served upon CBI on 21.06.1999. In view of this fact, the Special Judge, Delhi, directed by the order dated 03.03.2000 to handover all the articles/jewellery to the Income Tax Department and accordingly the CBI handed over the seized documents and jewellery to the department vide panchnama dated 21.8.2000. After the order of the Court and handing over of the seized documents, jewellery by the CBI to the department, notice u/s 158BC was issued to the assessee to file her return of undisclosed income for the block period ending on 21.08.2000 and the return of undisclosed income was fil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e that it is the provisions of Section 158BE (1) (b) of the Act, which apply in the case of the assessee, which are quoted herein below:- 158BE. (1) The order under section 158BC shall be passed- (a) within one year from the end of the month in which the last of the authorisations for search under section 132 or for requisition under section 132A, as the case may be, was executed in cases where a search is initiated or books of account or other documents or any assets are requisitioned after the 30th day of June, 1995, but before the 1st day of January, 1997; (b) within two years from the end of the month in which the last of the authorisations for search under section 132 or for requisition under section 132A, as the case ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ar, as the stipulated period of limitation in the present case would be one year as is provided under Section 158BE (1) (a) of the Act. The Tribunal, therefore, rightly came to conclusion that the assessment order passed on 29.8.2002, was not a valid assessment as it was beyond the period of one year and barred by limitation. Consequently, it was quashed.The contention of learned counsel for the department is that last requisition was sent on 15.6.1999 and served upon CBI on 21.6.1999, so, case will fall within the ambit of Section 158BE (1) (a) of the Act and limitation will be of two years since the date of execution of the requisition. The argument of learned counsel for the department is not acceptable because when first requisition dat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
