9911796707
TMI Blog1980 (10) TMI 37X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wife of V. K. Jain, and Smt. Karuna Jain, wife of S. K. Jain. Its financial year is from April to March each year. There is another firm, viz., M/s. Auto Agro Industries. It is also a registered partnership concern consisting of V. K. Jain, S. K. Jain, Smt. Swarna Jain, wife of O. P. Jain, and Smt. Santosh Jain, wife of late S. P. Jain. Both the firms are income-tax assessees. On April 24, 1971, the premises of the petitioner were raided by the income-tax authorities. During the course of search, they seized all books of account, the documents including challans, receipt books, inspection reports, correspondence files, etc. Aggrieved against the raids, searches and seizure, Smt. Sunanda Rani, partner of the petitioner, filed a writ petit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... i B. N. Kirpal and <?xml:namespace prefix = st2 /> Shri D. D. Verma. Further proceedings for assessment for the year 1970-71 onwards are stayed pending the disposal of the application. Shri D. D. Verma prays for time for filing a reply. Case for 12-2-1973. The application was posted thereafter before the same learned judge on February 12, 1973, who confirmed the order dated January 24, 1973. The department again moved a civil miscellaneous in the said which was numbered as C. M. No. 469-W of 1973. It was disposed of by Rajinder Sachar J. on March 5, 1973, by passing the following order: " This is an application seeking clarification of my order dated 23rd November, 1971. The clarification sought is whether the stay order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sed. The case of the petitioner is that the department cannot make the assessment, now as its cases had become barred by time on March 31, 1972. It has file three writ petitions, namely, C.W.P. Nos. 6236, 6233 and 6230 of 1974, relating to the assessment years 1967-68, 1968-69 and 1969-70, respectively, praying that the impugned notices be quashed and the ITO prohibited from making the assessment. Similarly, three writ petitions have been filed by Smt. Karuna Rani Jain, namely, C.W.P. No. 6231, 6232 and 6228 of 1974, relating to the assessment years 1967-68, 1968-69 and 1969-70, respectively, and three by Smt. Sunanda Rani Jain, namely, C.W.P. Nos. 6226,6234 and 6225 of 1974, relating to the said assessment years, respectively. The writ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gth and given due considerations to their arguments. In order to determine the question it will be relevant to refer to s. 153 of the Act which relates to the time-limit for completion of assessments and reassessments. It reads as follows: " 153. (1) No order of assessment shall be made under section 143 or section 144 at any time after (a) the expiry of (i) four years from the end of the assessment year in which the income was first assessable, where such assessment year is an assessment year commencing on or before the 1st day of April, 1967 ; (ii) three years from the end of the assessment year in which the income was first assessable, where such assessment year is the assessment year commencing on the 1st day of April, 1968; (i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... espondents are entitled to pass an order in the case of the petitioner before the, expiry of the said period from the date of the dismissal of the writ petitions. The writ petitions were dismissed on August 12, 1974. According to them, the case of the petitioner could be decided by December 20, 1974. It is said by the respondents that as there was ample time to pass the order, the ITO in fairness to the petitioner, issued notices to it. The case hinges on the interpretation of Expln. 1 to s. 153. From a reading of the Explanation, it is evident that in case the assessment proceeding is stayed by an order or injunction of any court that period shall be excluded in computing the period of limitation for the purpose of s. 153. The question ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bove-said observations, I am of the opinion that the word " assessment " as used in Expln. 1 is comprehensive enough to include an order of assessment. Therefore, if the passing of the order is stayed, the ITO shall be entitled to exclude that period in computing the period of limitation for the purpose of completing the assessment. It is evident from the various orders of the High Court that it had no objection in case the proceedings regarding assessment continued but it had directed that the final order be not passed. From the order, it cannot be spelt out that all the proceedings regarding the assessment should have been completed before the decision of the writ petitions and the order should have been passed immediately after the de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
