2008 (1) TMI 338

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....58BE read with explanation 2 the Tribunal was justified in holding the assessment orders passed by the Assessing Officer as barred by time? (ii) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the authorisation for search made with approval of search operation could not be validly given by D.C.I.T. so as to vitiate the assessment proceedings under Section 158BE?" 3. The necessary facts are, that on 18.3.1996, Rs.8.35 lacs were seized by the S.H.O., Abu Road and the information was sent to the Commissioner of Income-tax about the seizure on 21.3.1996, who informed the Assistant Director, who investigated, and on enquiry, it was revealed, that the seized cash belonged to the respondent asse....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....since the assessment order was passed on 13.11.97, it becomes barred by time, and also on the ground, that there was no previous approval, obtained from the CIT, to pass the assessment order in question. Learned Tribunal was of the opinion, that the assessment was barred by time, inasmuch as the requisition by the Tribunal was made on 25.3.1996, and the assessment was completed on 13.11.1997. Regarding the effect of Finance Act of 1998, whereby the amendment was inserted with effect from 1.7.1995, it was held that, that is of no help to the Revenue, as the assessment that had already become barred by limitation, and could not be regularized by the retrospective amendment. It was also held, that the subsequent law cannot validate an order, w....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tion 132A, the authorization is deemed to have been executed on actual receipt of the assets, by the authorized officer, which, in the present case, were received on 5.6.1997, pursuant to the order of this Court dated 16.5.1997, passed in Criminal Misc. Petition, referred-to above, and therefore, the limitation is required to be calculated for all purposes accordingly. Likewise, it was also contended, that a look at the provisions of Section 158BG would also show, that since the authorization is deemed to have been executed on 5.6.97, when the assets were received, the provisions of proviso (b) to Section 158BG apply, as it then existed as on 5.6.1997, and thereunder, the Dy. Commissioner of Income tax was the competent authority, for accor....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ies to reopen the assessment, when the reopening was clearly barred by limitation. A look at the amending provision being the Finance Act 2 of 1998, Section 46 thereof does show, that the words used are "In Section 158BE of the Income Tax Act, after sub section(2), the existing explanation shall be renumbered as Explanation 1 and after Explanation 1 as so renumbered, the following Explanation shall be inserted and shall be deemed to have been inserted with effect from the 1^st day of July, 1995". In our view, this language leaves no manner of doubt, that the legislature, expressly, and in categoric terms, amended the provision with retrospective effect, with effect from 1^st July, 1995, and the Explanation inserted or added, has been deemed....