2013 (9) TMI 871

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Income Tax (Appeals), Jodhpur ['CIT (A)'] was dismissed. The facts in brief are that search operations were carried out at the residential premises of the assessee-respondent on 03.02.1999. The Assessing Officer ('AO') framed assessment under Section 158BC of the Act by assessment order dated 27.04.2001. Aggrieved against the said assessment order, the assessee preferred appeal before the CIT(A), which was allowed on the CIT(A) coming to the conclusion that the block assessment order was not passed within the time limit prescribed in the Act and, therefore, the same was treated as time barred. The appeal preferred by the Department against the order dated 20.02.2008 passed by the CIT(A) was dismissed by the Tribunal on coming to t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Almirah in last bed room of residence of the appellant. Subsequently, the search party visited the residence of the appellant on 13.4.1999 and withdrew the prohibitory order u/s 132(3) relating to the Almirah sealed earlier on 3-2-1999 and a fresh Panchnama dated 13-4-1999 was drawn. Perusal of the said Panchnama dated 13-4-1999 shows that nothing was found nor any thing was seized from the said sealed Almirah. This fact is clear from Para No.5(a) and 5(b) to the Panchnama dated 13-4-1999. During the course of proceedings on 13-4-1999, no statement was recorded. The proceedings on 13-4- 1999 commenced at 2:30 PM and closed on 3:00 PM on the same day. What was the purpose of issuing a prohibitory order for an empty Almirah is not known. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n the Act and, therefore, has to be treated as time barred." Similarly, the Tribunal in its order dated 12.09.2012 observed thus:- "We have considered the submissions of ld DR and gone through the orders of the authorities below. In the present case, it is an admitted fact that the search was conducted on 03.02.1999 at the residential premises of the assessee and the Panchnama was drawn on the same date. All the incriminating documents, valuable jewellery, cash etc. were found only on that date. On the said date of search, one almirah was sealed by passing the prohibitory order u/s 132(3) of the Act on 03.02.1999 and the said prohibitory order was lifted on 13.04.1999. However, nothing was seized or found from the said almirah. Even n....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....re requisitioned on or after the 1st day of January, 1997. (2) ....... Explanation-1......... Explanation-2.- For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that the authorisation referred to in sub-section (1) shall be deemed to have been executed,- (a) in the case of search, on the conclusion of search as recorded in the last panchnama drawn in relation to any person in whose case the warrant of authorisation has been issued; (b) in the case of requisition under section 132A, on the actual receipt of the books of account or other documents or assets by the Authorised Officer." The contention of the Revenue is that since the last Panchnama was drawn on 13.04.1999, the search was concluded on that date and, as such, the ....