2016 (10) TMI 1236

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ns and hence, the same kindly be quashed. 2. The ld. CIT (A)-III, Jaipur erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in holding that the impugned order passed u/s 206C (6) r/w 206C(7) of the Act dated 31.03.2015 by the ITO, is not barred by limitation and therefore, erred in upholding the validity of the impugned order. The impugned order so passed on dated 31.03.2015 i.r.t. FY 2007-08 after a lapse of a long period of almost seven years, is contrary to the intention of the legislature and to the various judicial pronouncements and hence, is certainly barred by limitation and therefore the same kindly be quashed in limine. 3. Rs. 16,92,315/-: The ld. CIT (A)-III, Jaipur erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in confirming....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d time. The assessee filed reply to the show cause. However, the AO was not satisfied and held the assessee in default within the meaning of section 206C(6) read with section 206C(7) of the Act for non collection of tax of Rs. 2,72,87,660/- including interest. The assessee aggrieved by this order, preferred an appeal before ld. CIT (A). Before ld. CIT (A) also the assessee had challenged the order on the ground of limitation. However, the ld. CIT (A) dismissed the ground and held that the action of the AO is well within time. 5. Aggrieved, the assessee has filed the present appeal before us. 6. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has reiterated the submissions as made in the written brief and placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble An....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e i.e. at least within 6 years from the end of the assessment year. Further reliance is placed upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh High Court wherein the Hon'ble High Court after considering the various case laws held that the revenue authorities are bound to exercise the powers within a reasonable time. It was held that a period of four years constitute a reasonable time. After taking into account the various periods of limitations which ranges from 2 to 4 years except in exceptional case, it was held that intention of the Parliament not to prescribe limitation has not given license to the AO to hold the assessee to ransom for all time to come but to ensure that all pre-assessment taxes are collected promptly and such proceedin....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....om the above finding of the ld. CIT (A), it is clear that ld. CIT (A) has not considered the case laws and has merely rejected the ground by observing that the provisions contained in section 206C of the Act do not prescribe any time limit for initiating the proceedings or for passing the order thereunder. The above finding of ld. CIT (A) is contrary to the case laws as relied by the ld. Counsel for the assessee. In the present case the order has been passed beyond 6 years from the date of assessment is under challenge. Therefore, respectfully following the decision of the Coordinate Bench rendered in the case of State Bank of India vs. ITO (supra) wherein the Hon'ble Coordinate Bench has considered the conflicting view and applied the judg....