TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (12) TMI 377
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....antak, learned Senior Advocate for the petitioners submits that in the present case, there is overwhelming material available on record which establishes that no income had escaped assessment for the assessment year 2002-03. He submits that the income of Rs. 10.33 Crores, which is alleged to have escaped assessment was the subject matter of the order dated 27.09.2002 made under Section 158 BC of the I.T. Act, in which, a block assessment was carried out and this very income was directed to be added to the income of the petitioners as unexplained cash credits. He points out that the order dated 27.09.2002 was however set aside by the Commissioner (Appeals) vide order dated 13.07.2006. He points out that even for the assessment year 2002-03, regular assessment was undertaken and culminated in the issuance of orders dated 21.03.2005 under Section 143(3) of the I.T. Act. In the course of these assessment proceedings as well, information was sought for in respect of this very income and upon furnish of such information, the assessment orders came to be made. Mr. Kantak submits that in these circumstances, there was absolutely no material on record for the assessing officer to have any r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....opments are clearly irrelevant for deciding the issues raised in the present petition. 7. Ms. Linhares submits that in the present case, the relevant assessment year is 2002-03. She submits that the order dated 27.09.2002 made under Section 158 BC of the I.T. Act admittedly, did not relate to this assessment year. She submits that even if certain amounts may not have qualified as income for the years for which the block assessment was carried out, this amount of Rs. 10.33 Crores certainly qualifies to be treated as income for the relevant assessment year 2002-03 for the reasons quite cogently set out in the communication addressed to the petitioners furnishing reasons. She therefore submits that the orders dated 27.09.2002 and 13.07.2006 are quite irrelevant and cannot form the basis for questioning the impugned notice or the impugned order. 8. Ms. Linhares submits that the precise character of the amount of Rs. 10.33 Crores needs to be investigated and full opportunity will be afforded to the petitioners to give their say consequent upon reopening of the assessment proceedings. She therefore submits that the present petition may be dismissed since, the challenge in the pe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the regular assessment for assessment year 2002-03, the respondents, had issued notice to the petitioners under Section 142 of the I.T. Act, seeking inter alia particulars and clarifications with regard to this very income of Rs. 10.33 Crores, which notices are dated 07.02.2005 and 18.03.2005. The petitioners have placed on record that necessary particulars as well as clarifications were furnished by the petitioners in writing and petitioners' representative even appeared before the first respondent on 18.03.2005 to explain the status and character of such amounts. Based upon all this, orders were made under Section 143(3) of the I.E. Act by the first respondent assessing the income for assessment year 2002-03, in respect of both the petitioners. 15. From the aforesaid it is quite clear that on the date when the impugned notice dated 18.10.2006 was issued by the respondents seeking to reopen the assessment on the ground that the amount of Rs. 10.33 Crores had escaped assessment, the following orders had already been made:- a) Order dated 27.09.2002 under Section 158 BC of the I.T. Act, by which the amount of Rs. 10.33 Crores was directed to be added to the income of the p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd in paragraphs 22 and 23, which read as under:- "22. For the present petition, it is not necessary to consider and determine or decide any larger issues or controversy. The factual situation in the present case is undisputed. The search and seizure proceedings culminated in block assessment, which block assessment was subject-matter of challenge at the instance of the petitioners. A perusal of the order of the Tribunal would reveal that the Tribunal was called upon to decide the contentions, which have been raised in para 2 of one of its orders. One of the contentions raised was that the assessment extends to income disclosed in regular proceedings before the assessment officer. The Tribunal has permitted authorities to make detailed submissions and thereafter in para 12 of the order has gone into the details of the search proceedings. Thereafter, it considered the law on the point and subsequently held that the assessment cannot be sustained and the appeal challenging the search and seizure deserves to be allowed. Reasons are contained in paras 12 to 18 of the order passed by the Tribunal. The search and seizure proceedings were commented upon and it is worthwhile noting tha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....be quashed. In this case as well, block assessment orders have been made treating this amount as income vide order dated 27.09.2002. This order was however reversed by the Commissioner (Appeals) on 13.07.2006 and soon thereafter the respondents, proceeded to issue impugned notice dated 18.10.2006, even though, there was really no material to suggest that any income had escaped assessment. 20. Though, it is true that the developments which have taken place during the pendency of the present petition should not ordinarily be taken into consideration for determining the validity or otherwise of the impugned orders, in the present case, it is necessary to note that even the appeal of the respondents against the order dated 13.07.2006 made by the Commissioner (Appeals), was dismissed by the ITAT vide Judgment and Order dated 03.12.2009. The petitioners have also placed on record material in the form of awards of Arbitral Tribunal and permission from Reserve Bank of India to repatriate the amount of Rs. 10.33 Crores in foreign currency to the parties to whom the same was found to be due and payable in terms of the awards. Though, we have really not taken into consideration all this mate....