9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 1401X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onstituting the existing liability as per specific provisions u/s 132B - Held that:- The judgement of a Division Bench of this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Ludhiana Vs Sh. Sandeep Jain and others [2014 (10) TMI 585 - PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT] covers the case in favour of the assessee. It was held that Explanation 2 to Section 132B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is prospective in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ether under the facts & circumstances of the case, the Tribunal order is unsustainable, as no interest could be charged in the event of department not responding to the assessee's request for adjustment of cash seized against self assessment tax constituting the existing liability as per specific provisions u/s 132B of the Income Tax Act, 1961? II. Whether under the facts & circumstances of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sion Bench of this Court dated 29.09.2014 in ITA-261-2014 titled as Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Ludhiana Vs Sh. Sandeep Jain and others covers the case in favour of the assessee. It was held that Explanation 2 to Section 132B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is prospective in nature w.e.f. 01.06.2013. The present appeal is in respect of the assessment year 2008-2009. In view of the said judge ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not lay down the correct law. He also relied upon the memorandum explaining the Finance Bill to contend that Explanation 2 to Section 132B is retrospective.
6. In these circumstances, the questions of law are answered in favour of the appellant/assessee. It is admitted that the order of the Tribunal is liable to be set aside and is accordingly set aside. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
