ALL CARGO 153A CONFIRMED BY BOMBAY HIGH COURT ORDER DT21.4.2015

[MALAY CHATURVEDI]

“37. We do not see as to how while allowing the appeal of the assessee and setting aside the order of the Commissioner under section 263 could the judgment be said to be laying down a proposition and as canvassed by Mr. Pinto. True it is that the assessment which has to be made in pursuance of the notice is in relation to the six years. An order will have to be made in that regard. While making the order the income or the return of income filed for all these assessment years is to be taken into account. A reference will have to be made to the income disclosed therein. However, the scope of enquiry, though not confined as held by the High Court of Karnataka, it essentially revolves around the search or the requisition under section 132A as the case may be. We do not find anything in these observations and reproduced above which would enable us to conclude that the Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Murli Agro requires reconsideration or does not lay down a correct principle of law. We cannot, therefore, accede to the submissions of Mr. Pinto and

revisit any of the conclusions rendered by the Division Bench of thisCourt.”

AI Summary

Court Upholds All Cargo 153A Order; No Reconsideration of Murli Agro Judgment; Focus on Section 132A Notices The Bombay High Court confirmed an order regarding All Cargo 153A on April 21, 2015. The discussion involves the interpretation of a judgment related to income tax assessments over six years, following a notice under section 132A. The court's decision does not support the argument that the judgment in Murli Agro requires reconsideration or is incorrect. The scope of inquiry is not limited, but centers around search or requisition actions. The court rejected arguments for revisiting the Division Bench's conclusions, maintaining the validity of the existing legal principles.