DCIT, CHENNAI V. Shri Rakesh Sarin, CHENNAI

ITSSA 66/CHNY/2007

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8271 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 2 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-06-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 09-06-2011
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 23-03-2007
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: K RAVI
• Keywords: Search and seizure; Block assessment

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH A CHENNAI (BEFORE SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER) .. I.T. (SS) A. NO. 66/MDS/2007 BLOCK ASSESSMENT PERIOD : 1997-98 TO 2002-03 AND PART OF 2003-04 THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE II(1), CHENNAI 600 034. (APPELLANT) V. SHRI RAKESH SARIN, NO.5E, MOOKAMBIKAI COMPLEX, LADY DESIKA ROAD, CHENNAI 600 004. PAN : ADXPR7428R (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI SHAJI P. JACOB RESPONDENT BY : SHRI K. RA VI O R D E R PER ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : IN THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE, IT HAS RAISED ALTOGETHER 27 GROUNDS. ONE OF THE MAIN GRIEVANCE RAISED BY REVEN UE APPEARS AT GROUND NO.26, WHEREBY IT ASSAILS THE ORDER OF THE C IT(APPEALS) THAT THE BLOCK ASSESSMENT WAS TIME BARRED AND BAD IN LAW . 2. WHEN THE MATTER WAS TAKEN UP FOR HEARING, LEARNE D COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, PLACING A COPY OF ORDER DATED 4.3.201 1 OF HON'BLE I.T. (SS) A. NO. 66/MDS/07 2 JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN W.P.NO.25078 OF 2005, SUBMITTED THAT HON'BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT HAD HELD THE BLOC K ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 30.6.2005 AS BARRED BY LIMITATION AND WITHOUT JURISDICTION. ACCORDING TO LEARNED COUNSEL, THE APPEAL NOW FILED BY THE REVENUE WAS AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(APPEALS) FOR THE B LOCK ASSESSMENT, DATED 30.6.2005, AND HENCE WOULD NOT SURVIVE ANY MO RE. 3. LEARNED D.R. FAIRLY ADMITTED THAT IN VIEW OF THE DECISION OF HON'BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT, THE APPEAL FILED BY REVENUE NO MORE SURVIVES. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE CONTENTIONS AND ALSO CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH THE ORDER OF HON'BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN W .P. NO.25078 OF 2005 (SUPRA). IT WAS HELD BY HON'BLE JURISDICTIONA L HIGH COURT AT PARA 18 OF ITS ORDER AS UNDER:- 18. IN ALL THESE CASES, THE INCOME TAX BENCHES OF D IFFERENT HIGH COURTS AND TRIBUNAL/BOARD HAVE, ON IDENTICAL C IRCUMSTANCES, HELD THAT THE PROHIBITORY ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 132(3) SHALL BE IN FORCE FOR 60 DAYS AND ANY SEARCH AND SEIZ URE BY LIFTING PROHIBITORY ORDER AFTER 60 DAYS DOES NOT AMOUNT TO AC TUAL SEARCH AND SEIZURE, AND ANY SEARCH AND SEIZURE AFTER LIFTING THE EXPIRED PROHIBITORY ORDER CANNOT BE REGARDED AS CONT INUATION OF SEARCH COMMENCED AND CANNOT BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT F OR ASCERTAINING THE DATE OF EXECUTION OF THE LAST OF W ARRANT OF AUTHORIZATION AND THE SEARCH SHALL BE TREATED AS CO NTINUOUS ONLY WHEN THERE IS NO UNEXPLAINED GAP BETWEEN THE COMMEN CEMENT AND COMPLETION OF THE SEARCH AND THE SEARCH ONCE COMPLE TED CANNOT I.T. (SS) A. NO. 66/MDS/07 3 BE RESUMED WITHOUT VALID REASON AND THE LAST PANCHA NAMA IS THE DOCUMENT EVIDENCING CONCLUSION OF ACTUAL SEARCH AND THE DATE OF SUCH PANCHNAMA IS TO BE REGARDED AS THE DATE OF CON CLUSION OF SEARCH AND EXECUTION OF THE WARRANT, AND THE BLOCK ASSESSMENT SHALL BE WITHIN TWO YEARS FROM SUCH DATE AND ANY ASSE SSMENT BEYOND TWO YEARS FROM SUCH DATE IS BARRED BY LIMITATIO N. THE LEGAL AND FACTUAL ASPECTS INVOLVED HEREIN AS DISCUS SED ABOVE WILL ONLY ESTABLISH THAT THE IMPUGNED BLOCK ASSESSMENT OR DER DATED 30.06.2005 IS BARRED BY LIMITATION AND IS WITHOUT JU RISDICTION AND CANNOT BE ENFORCED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE AND THE ASS ESSEE IS ENTITLED TO GET THE RELIEFS AS SOUGHT FOR HEREIN. 5. SINCE HON'BLE HIGH COURT HAS ALREADY HELD THAT B LOCK ASSESSMENT WAS BARRED BY LIMITATION, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE BEFORE US WOULD NOT SURVIVE ANY MORE. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE I S DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AFTER CONCLUSION OF HEARING ON THE NINTH DAY OF JUNE, 2011. SD/- SD/- (GEORGE MATHAN) (ABRAHAM P. GEORGE) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED THE 9 TH JUNE, 2011. KRI. COPY TO: APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/CIT(A)-X/ CIT, CENTRAL-II, CHENNAI-34/D.R./GUARD FILE