TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (5) TMI 683
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ckground facts may be noticed in brief. On 24.11.1991 a search and seizure operation was conducted in M/s. Vishnu and Co. and Lalwani Group of Cases. In the search operation the assessee who is one of the members of Lalwani group cases, was found that he had taxable income but had not file the return of income for the Assessment Year 1992-1993. Consequently, a notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act was served on the assessee. In response, the assessee filed return of income on 31st of August, 1995. The assessee in the course of assessment proceedings set up a case that he had received remittances of foreign exchange which were covered under Remittance of Foreign Exchange and Investment in Foreign Exchange Bonds (Immunities & Exem....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er, could be made about the remittances? 2.Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in deleting the addition of Rs.28,683,289/- made by the Assessing Officer to the assessee's income on account of unexplained cash credit in the assessee's bank account which was confirmed in the first appeal by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)? 3. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that no interest under section 234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act,1961 was leviable on the addition of Rs.28,63,289/- made by the Assessing Officer to the assessee's income? Heard Sri Shambhu Chopra, learne....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that he has received such remittance; (c ) the fact that the recipient has received a remittance shall not be taken into account and shall be inadmissible as evidence in any proceeding relating to any offence or the imposition of any penalty under any such law." It opens with non-obstante clause meaning thereby the provisions contained in the Act have precedence over the other laws for the time being in force. The Tribunal has found that the clauses (b) & (c) of Section 3(1) of the Act provides that no inquiry or investigation shall be commenced against the recipient under any such law on the ground that he has received such remittance, is a provision providing complete immunity against the inquiry or investigation. It is correct ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ced below:- Question No. 5 : It is provided that the Foreign Exchange Bonds (India Development Bonds) may be held by banks acting in a fiduciary capacity on behalf of non-resident Indian/overseas corporate bodies, but when such bnds are gifted to a person resident in India, is it necessary that the identity of such non-resident Indian/overseas corporate body is disclosed before any authority? Answer : No, the identity of the NRI/OCB would not be required to be disclosed at all, and, in fact, must not be disclosed. In view of the above, we find that the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the immunity granted under the remittance under Remittance of Foreign Exchange & Investment in Foreign Exchange Bonds....