Case Details

Citation(s)
2009 SLG 2034 2009 SLD 2034 (2009) 308 ITR 168 (2009) 177 TAXMAN 380
Delhi High Court
IT APPEAL NO. 1198 OF 2008, NOVEMBER 12, 2008
RAJIV SHAKDHER AND BADAR DURREZ AHMED, JJ.

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395


Deprecated: preg_match(): Passing null to parameter #2 ($subject) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 411

Deprecated: htmlspecialchars(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 435

Law:

Section:

[2009] 177 Taxman 380 (Delhi)/[2009] 308 ITR 168 (Delhi)/[2009] 221 CTR 310 (Delhi) [2009] 177 TAXMAN 380 (DELHI) HIGH COURT OF DELHI Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi-VIII, New Delhi v. S.K. Katyal* RAJIV SHAKDHER AND BADAR DURREZ AHMED, JJ. IT APPEAL NO. 1198 OF 2008 â-  NOVEMBER 12, 2008 Section 158BE of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Block assessment in search cases - Time-limit for completion of - Block period from 1-4-1990 to 17-11-2000 - Whether merely mentioning in panchnama that a search has been temporarily suspended does not, ipso facto, continue search and it would have to be seen as a fact as to whether search continued or had concluded - Held, yes - Whether panchnama mentioned in Explanation 2(a) to section 158BE is a panchnama which documents conclusion of a search and if a panchnama does not, from facts recorded therein, reveal that a search was at all carried out on day to which it relates, then it would not be a panchnama relating to search and, consequently, it would not be a panchnama of type which finds mention in Explanation 2(a) to section 158BE - Held, yes - A search under section 132 was conducted on 17-11-2000 in residential premises of assessee - As per panchnama drawn up on 17-11-2000 in course of search, certain documents, cash, bank locker keys and jewellery were seized - A restraint order was also passed in respect of cash box of an almirah in which jewellery found during search was kept - Said panchnama also stated that search proceeding were temporarily concluded for day to be commenced subsequently - On 3-1-2001, restraint order was revoked and keys of almirah were returned to assessee - A panchnama was also prepared on 3-1-2001, but no search and seizure took place on that date - Thereafter, block assessment order was passed on 30-1-2003 - Whether, on facts, panchnama drawn up on 3-1-2001 could be regarded as a document evidencing conclusion of search and 3-1-2001 could be regarded as date on which warrant of authorization was executed - Held, no - Whether when no further search was conducted after 17-11-2000, it was panchnama dated 17-11-2000 which was relatable to conclusion of search and, therefore, period of limitation…
🔒
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