TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal rules against retroactive surcharge levy pre-June 2002</h1> <h3>Commissioner of Income-Tax Versus Roshan Singh Makker.</h3> Commissioner of Income-Tax Versus Roshan Singh Makker. - [2006] 287 ITR 160, 203 CTR 125, 154 TAXMANN 372 Issues:Levy of surcharge on undisclosed income for a block period before June 1, 2002.Analysis:The appeal raised the issue of whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in confirming the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)' order directing not to levy surcharge on the tax worked out on the undisclosed income for a block period from April 1, 1990, to April 6, 2000. The search and seizure operations were conducted before June 1, 2002, and the Assessing Officer had determined the tax liability along with surcharge. However, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) deleted the surcharge addition based on previous Tribunal orders citing that the proviso for surcharge was added to the statute book effective from June 1, 2002, and not applicable to searches conducted before that date. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal and upheld the decision regarding the non-levy of surcharge on undisclosed income.The Tribunal's order highlighted that the proviso to section 113 of the Income-tax Act, which allows for the levy of surcharge on undisclosed income, was inserted with effect from June 1, 2002. Since the search in the present case was conducted before this date, the surcharge provision did not apply. The Tribunal relied on various judgments supporting this interpretation, emphasizing that the levy of surcharge was not applicable to cases where searches were carried out before June 1, 2002. The Tribunal concluded that no substantial question of law arose for consideration in the case, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.In summary, the judgment revolved around the interpretation of the proviso to section 113 of the Income-tax Act and its applicability to the levy of surcharge on undisclosed income for a block period before June 1, 2002. The decision was based on the timeline of the search and seizure operations, with the Tribunal affirming that the surcharge provision introduced in 2002 did not retroactively apply to searches conducted prior to its enactment. The Tribunal's reliance on previous judgments and the lack of distinction pointed out by the Revenue led to the dismissal of the appeal, as no substantial question of law was found to be present in the case.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
