TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (7) TMI 205
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he levy of interest under section 158BFA(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?" 3. With the consent of the parties, filing of paper book is dispensed with and the matter is heard finally at this stage itself. 4. This issue has arisen on the following factual background. Search and seizure operation under section 132 of the Income-tax Act (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") was carried out at the premises of the assessee on February 26, 1997, March 5, 1997 and March 20, 1997. When- ever such search is conducted, the assessee has to necessarily file revised income-tax return. For filing such a return, notice under section 158BC of the Act is to be issued to the assessee and the assessee is required to file the return within 45 days the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal") has allowed the appeal and held that no such interest could be charged in the circumstances of this case. According to the Tribunal, the assessee had asked for the documents within 45 days. These documents were supplied only on November 20, 1998, and thereafter the return was filed within 45 days from that date. The discussion of the Tribunal while taking this view is as follows : ". . . Under clause (a) the levy of interest under section 158BFA(1) terminates on the date of furnishing the return of income when such return has not been filed within the time prescribed under section 158BC. Under clause (b), the interest runs till the completion of the assessmen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....22, 1997. The assessee has within reasonable time requested the Assessing Officer to grant the assessee the copies of the seized material. In the letter dated November 1, 1997, the assessee has specifically also clarified that without the seized material the assessee would not be able to file the block return. Further, from the letter dated November 20, 1998, which is the acknowledgment of having taken all the photocopies required, it is noticed that the group companies' details are in relation to 10 persons. It is further noticed that after obtaining the seized material on November 20, 1998 within 40 days on December 1, 1999, the assessee has filed its block return. This being so, it would have to be held that the delay in filing block ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ew it quite well that it was imperative upon the assessee to file the return once search was carried out under section 132 of the Act and there- fore, immediately after the search was concluded, i.e., March 20, 1997, the assessee could ask for the aforesaid documents. According to the learned counsel for the Department, it is the negligence on the part of the assessee in demanding the documents only after the service of notice under section 158BC after the expiry of 40 days, when the assessee knew that the period of limitation prescribed is of 45 days for submitting the return. 8. She also referred to the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) wherein the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) remarked that even for the subseque....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sessee. The assessee was required to file return for the block period within 45 days from this date, i.e., by 5-10-1996. (iv) 1-10-1997 The assessee asked for the documents to enable it to file the return as relevant documents were seized by the Department during search. (v) 20-11-1998 The documents as demanded by the assessee were sup plied to it by the Department. (vi) 1-1-1999 Return filed by the assessee. 11. The assessee knew fully well that once the search is conducted under section 132 of the Act, it was compulsory to file the return. Though, such a return was to be filed within 45 days of service of notice under section 158BC of the Act, as a prudent person, he could have asked for the copies of documen....