9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (7) TMI 1023X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Tax Act. As and when any report is prepared and used against the petitioner on the basis of the said survey, it would be open to the petitioner to raise all such grounds which are permissible in law before the appropriate forum. The concerned authority will decide such an objection independently without being influenced by the tentative opinion expressed by us in this order. - W.P. No.7187/2012 - - - Dated:- 31-7-2012 - Shantanu Kemkar and Prakash Shrivastava, JJ. Shri Vivek Tankha, learned senior Advocate with Shri Sumit Nema Adv., for the petitioner. Shri Sanjay Lal, learned counsel for the respondent/Income Tax Department on advance notice. JUDGEMENT Heard on the question of admission. In this writ petition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng to the mining operation is covered by the Mines and Mineral (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, therefore, the provisions of the income tax act can not be invoked for this purpose and the proper course open for the income tax authorities was to collect the necessary information from the mining authorities. He has also placed reliance upon the judgment of the Division Bench of the Orissa High Court in the matter of M/s. U.K. Mahapatra Co. and others Vs. Income Tax Officer (Headquarters) and others reported in 2008 (Supp.-II) OLR 970. Shri Sanjay Lal, learned counsel for the respondent/Income Tax Department has raised a preliminary objection that the present writ petition is premature since it has been filed against the proceeding ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n to the section and it is not in dispute that at the time of survey the income tax authorities so specified in the explanation were present. We are of the opinion that to assist the specified income tax authority if the other income tax officials and the registered valuer of the Income Tax Department along with his team were also present, then the proceedings under Section 133A of the Act can not be faulted on that sole ground. In the judgment of the Orissa High Court in the matter of M/s. U.K. Mahapatra (supra), the income tax officer (Headquarters) who was authorized by the Joint Director of income tax unit-2 to conduct the surveys of the premises in question was not an income tax authority under the said explanation but that is not the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
