Just a moment...

Report
ReportReport
Welcome to TaxTMI

We're migrating from taxmanagementindia.com to taxtmi.com and wish to make this transition convenient for you. We welcome your feedback and suggestions. Please report any errors you encounter so we can address them promptly.

Bars
Logo TaxTMI
>
×

By creating an account you can:

Report an Error
Type of Error :
Please tell us about the error :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home /

2008 (8) TMI 20

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t of assessee Mangla Marbles and Granite Pvt. Ltd). Sh. Deepak Aggarwal is one of the directors in Mangla Marbles and Granite Pvt. Ltd. 2. The common issue that arises for consideration in these appeals is with regard to the provisions of Section 158 BE, Explanation 2 read with Section 158 BE (1) (b). A search under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the "said Act") was conducted as per warrant dated 31.10.2000. In view of the provisions of Section 158BE (1)(b), the block assessment under Section 158 BC ought to have been completed on or before 31.10.2002. However, it was completed on 27.12.2002. The assessee's stand was that this was beyond the time prescribed under Section 158 BE (1) and, therefore, the a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.....: 294 ITR 444, concluded that the revocation order did not amount to execution of a search as no asset was seized under that order and what happened was only the revocation of the prohibitory order passed earlier. The Tribunal found that in this situation, it could not be said that there was an execution of a search on 23.12.2000 so as to enable the reckoning of the period of limitation from the end of December 2000. The assessment could, therefore, not be passed on any date beyond 31.10.2002. The Tribunal concluded that since the assessment order was passed on 27.12.2002, it was beyond time and consequently, the assessee's appeal was allowed. 4. The decision of this Court in Sarb Consulate (supra) is applicable to the facts of the presen....