https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202711 Where a prohibitory order under section 132(3) of the Income-tax Act was revoked on 21 December 2002 and no fresh order was issued, the search was treated as having concluded on that date. The record did not show that the search remained incomplete or was continued in close proximity thereafter, so the later panchnama dated 3 January 2003 could not by itself extend the search period or alter the completion date. The stated effect was that a later brief search entry does not postpone completion unless the continuation of the search is otherwise demonstrated. en-us Fri, 15 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 24 Dec 2012 17:55:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202711 Where a prohibitory order under section 132(3) of the Income-tax Act was revoked on 21 December 2002 and no fresh order was issued, the search was treated as having concluded on that date. The record did not show that the search remained incomplete or was continued in close proximity thereafter, so the later panchnama dated 3 January 2003 could not by itself extend the search period or alter the completion date. The stated effect was that a later brief search entry does not postpone completion unless the continuation of the search is otherwise demonstrated. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 15 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202711