TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2005 (3) TMI 90
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....R.D. Vyas J. and Shambhoo Singh J.) when following order was passed:- "16-3-2000 Shri Mohan Pathak, LC for the appellant. Heard on admission. Admit. Issue notice to the other side on payment of P.F. within a week." Section 260A of the Income-tax Act is akin to section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code. Sub-section (3) of section 260A provides rather makes it obligatory upon the High Court to formulate a substantial question of law for deciding the appeal. Sub-section (4) then provides that the appeal shall be heard only on the question so formulated. Any appeal, whether under section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code or under section 260A of the Act cannot be heard much less decided without there being a specific question of law formulat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ation to the premises of the assessee? 2. In the absence of any search warrant under section 132 ibid whether the Assessing Officer had the jurisdiction to make any assessment under Chapter XIV-B of the assessee for the block period in question? 3. Whether, the Assessing Officer had the jurisdiction to proceed against the assessee by taking recourse to the provisions of section 158BD for making assessment under Chapter XIV-B even in the absence of search warrant under section 132 of the Act issued in respect of the assessee's premises? 4. Whether the Tribunal was justified in allowing the assessee to challenge the assessment order on a preliminary ground having once submitted to the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer by not raising an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....inst the assessee for making a block assessment under Chapter XIV-B, i.e., under section 158BC. In other words, the preliminary objection was that in order to proceed to make block assessment under section 158BC there has to be an authorization as required under section 132 ibid and since in this case there was no authorization so far as the assessee is concerned, but it was in the name of Mr./ Mrs. Maheshwari, no assessment under section 158BC could have been made of the assessee. It was also contended that the survey conducted under section 133A cannot empower the Assessing Officer to proceed under section 158BC against an assessee. In the alternative, the assessee also raised other grounds on the merits in challenging the assessment orde....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 158BC against such other person and the provisions of this Chapter shall apply accordingly. 2(31) 'person' includes- (i) an individual, (ii) a Hindu undivided family, (iii) a company, (iv) a firm, (v) an association of persons or a body of individuals, whether incorporated or not, (vi) a local authority, and (vii) every artificial juridical person, not falling within any of the preceeding sub-clauses. Explanation.- For the purposes of this clause, an association of persons or a body of individuals or a local authority or an artificial juridical person shall be deemed to be a person, whether or not such person or body or authority or juridical person was formed or established or incorporated with the object of deriving income, prof....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to such persons as in this case the assessee is recovered in the search operation. In our opinion, the Tribunal committed an error of law in placing reliance on some statement of the Minister in deciding the case in favour of the assessee. In fact, the Tribunal should have concentrated and confined its discussion on section 158BD read with section 2(31) for deciding the issue involved. In our opinion, section 158BD read with section 2(31) of the Act is the complete answer to the question involved in this appeal against the assessee and in favour of the Commissioner on the facts found by the lower authorities. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we cannot accept the submission of learned counsel for the assessee when he urged that warran....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sue has to be dealt with strictly and since the whole thrust was against the director and his business/residential premises, the assessee cannot be made to suffer it being a separate legal entity. We do not agree. In our view, this submission has no merit. At the cost of repetition, we may observe that the case falls in section 158BD of the Act and hence, nothing survives. Learned counsel for the assessee placing reliance on the cases reported in CIT v. Kurban Hussain Ibrahamji Mithiborwala [1971] 82 ITR 821 (SC); Upper Doab Sugar Mills Ltd. v. CIT [2003] 263 ITR 97 (All) and [2001] 248 ITR 356 (sic) contended that the impugned order be upheld. We find no merit in this submission. In our opinion, the cases relied upon by learned counsel fo....