Case Details

Citation(s)
2012 SLG 3335 2012 SLD 3335 (2012) 346 ITR 100
Punjab and Haryana High Court
IT APPEAL Nos. 558 OF 2006 & 342 OF 2009 FEBRUARY 1, 2011
ADARSH KUMAR GOEL AND AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, JJ.
Ms. Urvashi Dhugga for the Appellant.

Commissioner of IncomE tax

v.

Naveen Verma*

Law:

Section:

Section 158BC of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Block assessment in search cases - Procedure for - Block period 1-4-1988 to 16-4-1999 - It is not permissible to quash block assessment proceedings merely on ground that period mentioned in notice was lesser than statutory period specified under section 158BC(a) [In favour of revenue] Provisions of section 158BC which provide that in notice under section 158BD the Assessing Officer should give clear period of 15 days for filing return are statutory recognition of the principles of natural justice which are applicable to assessment proceedings under the Act. The affected party is entitled to the fair opportunity and fair procedure. Since the period of 15 days has been specified statutorily, it may not be fair to expect filing of return in shorter period. At the same time, the effect of violation of the principles of natural justice is not to always nullify the exercise of jurisdiction unless prejudice is caused. Where period specified in the notice is less than the statutory period, no prejudice is caused, if return filed is taken into account. The notice specifying lesser period can be read as specifying the statutory period. Total absence of notice may be on a different footing but if notice is duly served, the assessee can either avail of the statutory time for filing of the return irrespective of shorter period mentioned in the notice or can be given fresh opportunity if it is held that the assessee suffered prejudice on account of shorter period mentioned in the notice. In any situation, it is not permissible to quash the block assessment proceedings merely on the ground that the period mentioned in the notice was lesser than the statutory period specified under section 158BC(a). Case review : Navin Verma v. Asstt. CIT [2006] 100 ITD 73 set aside. CASES REFERRED TO Navin Verma v. Asstt. CIT [2006] 100 ITD 73 (Delhi) (para 3) and State Bank of Patiala v.S.K. Sharma [1996] 3 SCC 364 (para 9) JUDGMENT Adarsh Kumar Goel, J. - Since the registry has not been able to send the files on account of fire in the court premises, learned counsel for the Revenue has furnished paper books which are taken on record. We proceed to…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492