Karnataka High Court
C Ramaiah Reddy vs The Assistant Commissioner Of Income ... on 8 September, 2010
Bench: N.Kumar, H.S.Kempanna
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ATAKA AT BANGALORE Dated this the 6 day of September, 28 10 PREESIENT THE HON BLE MR. Jus STICE NN KUMAR, AND as BETWEEN: Sri A Shankar, Advocate} Assistant Comms sioner tneome Tax (IMV , aa "ad action of the authorizing officer anterior to the ayy commencing the assessrnen! prohibitary order under section 182 ih, respect "of certain 5 ef wag gee oo, rr ae ee wb gk at Py gee Pog jewelleries. books of accounts, ete.. founc Later on, on 24.04 were earlier kepl uncer tie There was no seizure lected proceedings BS concluded in the panchanama. it states. the prohibitory oraer _ arn order of block wo ie as ee / ze SESORE fbenugtf Fhe pa wegary £4 gt was. passed can OS,12.1995 itsell. Therealte bog pe oe oe gegen ges Tee A et the Income Tax Act ny pea pie gta gd Was Dassec essment officer on 26.01.) Aggrieved by the said ae wae See oe be ithe assessee preferred an appeal. beiore the Tribunal in accordance with the provisions epithe taw, was prevailing at the relevant poin(-ef time. The- aSSESSER contended belore the Tribunal among olhe block assessment was barred Dy. limitation wwnecr.Section - f thesAct, When the matter was- before application for view of the of the issues lvdlyed in framed three Questions for consideration by the "points that were referred for consideration by SCOPE OF APPEAL ql could exarnine so fp Whether the Tripu io at what point of time the search 1 come fo a would said fo pape pb (a) examining whether the assessment in time or ofmerun LIMITATION Whether the erm within one year ror the end of the period in wich: tne last Section "152. was exectted. has to pe tuken to mean the execution of ihe rsuing of prohibilory thal are are $0 an 'the basis of the only that LOds resued _PANCHANAMA hether, where a search is ca the basis of the authorization resulling in seizure of some items, issue of prohibitory order on others, such search could be said to be genuine and comes to a clase only when the ARGUMENTS 4. 'The learnecl counsel for the «a Py should culminating im the in commie to the said complied with. A valid ie DPoCeE assessment and there was a valid search, when it is disputed, there ce issue of any notice under Section further coniended thai ite starting point of unilfation ama is made in respect of ceiGies conducting the Gain Search Are FIOL en i to visit. the premises lor searching a 1e-SuDdD "quent Visil is noi scection of the articles and og geen be by fhe eee oe EE pyeray vpuonbyerseareevarecn yes peor biLory JOE der. U AYLy Peart PUATICUTIAS are u visiis/inspection. they could not hanemas of searc COTISICS omy 98, ggg we ot : £ dle, peeve meee af ¢he merinrd af lemitatingy conmipiitat of lhe commencement of the period ol bmiutalion. ; ve : Pete - op ok -- Ls eg ogetg "E wy Sete mi 7 a rs oa iy os ms a-prokidbifory order as contemplated under Section power alter commencing tne authorized cllice Sn. ne 9 search to at any rate. -s adjourned date on which the panchanama is written subsequent visits or inspectic daily concluded that ireed as the last » period of limitation is to be computed. "the. learned Senior Counsel appearing earch proceedings were € "tne material collected during SERRE AG SERN Aa ne basis of the returns Uled in pursuance ONES % the assessing olficer passes a issued, In am appeal filec order, the ". "proceedings cannot i eorntinuation of search proceccdings under Section 132()) of Aet. Further, ne contendec "ation in which event ior Uae purpe more than one authori » which has to be limitation. it is the last of such auiporizad onsideration. ~ Purthér.- he. conte sursuenice of an authori pince a: "to. pass prohibitory order, fix the cate srveriient to him, fe can Visit the authorization, which was e has recorded that the search is completed would be basis ing point of imitation as contempiated under law, e Be eee ec ae BB for rey Therefore, the subsequent visits of the search proceedings atihorizavion., aa The authorizatio: £4 ey Play pueyey el oy et finally concluded not call for any interference: POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION -- os a "Wherher the Tribunal is entitled in law to look into "all the aspects of search in an app SSYTLCTH respect of a block asse Act, 1961? uaeneeY EES ET NENTS Ses e iS CCS a ee Os Cee on ne een, emt w joo point of limitation "for. the he block ass jon 158BE of ihe income Vax Aci. 196) sper pler Was fect from O1.07.1995. Section [SRE - tito effect from 01.06.2003, provides thal a - Section 122 or books of any asseis or requisition under In other Hon. lb defi a Ee pe ge Fee ty yt ee Bc losegd iTicOme. g = Explanation. -For the removal of doubts. if is hereby. declared] treat -- fa the assessment made under this. CNepter shall be in additlons to ihe. Choe cluded in the block period: {p} fhe total uncle aclos sed tie OME TE lau 1s abe may, foot Santee block period shall nat include the income assessed HW. GRY FEGUGr "assessinent fis incame Ops 8 Chapler shal assessed in nol be include a the regular assessment of GY OFeViOUs. yee a. included in the block assessee praves fo the sing Officer that anu part Ag Spy if eferred to in sub-section (1; relates (o Le ye i 1 fhe prevt sessment year for whic 8 year Reissnot enced or the date of fling the return of income under sub-section (1) of Section 1c9 jor any previous year has not expired. and such income or the transactions relating lo such ticorne are recorded on or before the daie of the searcivor- . requisition in the books of account or OLRER documents maintained i the eat relating to such previous years, (Ne. scid tricone shed] not be included in the bine 2 REF f the assess oliver the undisclosed income in IV-B. The total accordance : ae t the rate prescribec ib-section (2), Explanation ta the ¢ es that the assessment mace under tis Chapter shall be inv addition to the regular assessme ol vear including the biock period. it further relating to block clarifies that the total undisclosed ROR US Aan LARS ae NESS 2 3 shan wmf Seon " ron "oat pte Jnonget foot ah fs me et a, Nt re h a ied 30.06.1995 be it is av fipst appeal. However, now the position has cl , of Income "Tax period, first appeal Hes to the Commissic (Appeals) and Tribunal. Therelore first appel Jeo teewindindiary avidedk de > 3 Ley poy : jurisdiction which js eorter of uneisclosed income cH initiated under Section 132. The J82f1): Where the [Director General or rector] or the [Chief Commissioner -- or Commissioner) jor ary such (Joint Director) or "lf Yaad he yds god Wont Commissioner] as may be empowered in this behall by the Board], it consequence of 2 & ie norman in his possession. has reason fo. belleve thal fa} any person Ow summons under sub-section! i) oF Sechior. 37 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 fide of 1922), or under Sub- section: ie section 1S) 0 ma notice uuncler : cone subsection ! Section, 22 of % the Indian Mieame-foax Act, cor under. sub- Sec Or is suéd om produce, or cause fo be court <i other decuments as Such SLuTTONS or riolice, or a iL. aa ee -- we se we epabyee , - {b} any person fo whom a be issued uNli not, or * pr OdLICE OF couse "books of account which will be useful for, or relepant to, ari proceeding under the incdiart income- fA} ic} ssion. of any money, Pullion, jewellery. or ether' such prnorneny. ing edigees: ¢ bullion, fe or thing represents either ieholly or renrhiu oF . : " m8 i OEE Acts pot been, or HECcnnie for the purposes undisclosed hoor Director or the Chiey -Commissioner ar Commissioner, as the Ctise ise any Additional Direc » Depinay- Director, Assistant Comurissioner or Deputy Commissioner or incoime-tax. Of fleer, or "Suen Additional Dlrector or Additional Commissioner or Joint Director. oF wigan _ u fommissioner, as ihe case may be, may. aquinorise any Assistan) Director or DXre tor, Assistant Conumissioner or Income-fax So aulhort hereinafter referred lo as the.anthorised LESSEE: reason ot Pie TL OP OF Gre Mer _ i583 oT ee ee re Fyn onye a Ly Break open ine lock of any door, box, locker, Safe, alriran or other receptacle "jer exercising the potwers conferred by fi where the keys thereof are nol fliay- search any person who has got oui of. or about to get into, or is in, the puilc ig. place, vessel, vehicle or aircraft, if the authorised! BO ney officer has reason to suspect that such person. has secreted about his person any such books op , . neeen oy Say FPS Sars GCCOLTT, other docturienis, PREOPLCT), ll LLG be jewellery or other valuable article or ining: i ab . OPOKS OF o POSSE Ssion or ¢ obher docurmerus electronic record as <. section (1) of section: Tec! hnology y y Act. 2000 auihori cic CLT OPES. 'such boéks of ¢ decumenis, momely, DuUMion, - other paluable article or thing found as a = aa fs pe fon Pn ron os cared i, oft ia sy nigel a Of a a i os ag lion, jewellery or other Provided. t} ' Fas a resulf of such search 'shall not be seized but the authorised rok tay trade of the pusiness: hoo we "inthe form of: s article or (hing. being stock-In-tracde of se Sa Hci SHEE ee ON Provided further that where it is not possible or practicable to take physical poss place due to ils volume, weight or oiher physi or due to iis being Gf.a dange nature, the authorised authorised of Provided 'also thei nothing contained in the "secénd proviso shall apply in case of any Provided also that mo authorisation shall be issued by the Additional Director or Additional "Corunissioner or dom Director or Joint er on or after the iS of Octonper, q Corin ra) Li. The heading of Seciion [32° F words "search" and "seizure". rhe-word house or olfrer © y. or some evidence of guilty to be Wion of a criminal action for some crime or arged" (5% edition). The word act peat cy y as the "the ek's Law Dictiona Term implies a taking or 3 or comstruclive of - another person or persons" Sh edition). ny £% os A ES phot ees TO eae nia a hag be Ey o mye ryee be TEE TE bla e IZ. A Division Bench of this Court expiaining tne difference between search and seizure, searcn and an EN eee ifs mispection in the case ol 'G. AGADT AND BROTHERS VS. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, ENF ORCEMEN NORTHERN ZONE, BELGAUM [(1973).5TC XXKET : 243} hes . held as under:- a8 oF ae wes BS v= 3. y. . wie 'AU searches pub aul inspeciions are mer A, seth is' a thorough inspection _ building oF premises OF. of fis. } object of discovering - id furnish. evidenée 2 af gual ors ne alfence 4 oth which he is that Le whieh : COPICE sailed. ips 1@ object sought Jor is alias in pl Hf the 'had been kept in the ecuriler private OLE our book vopenly atall fimes and (hey could have been, found - on. mspection al ary time of the cay. then tne SEZ ive of such aecount books carmot be sce fo rape made afler a set arch" ES Thas Court in the case of SOUTHERN HERBALS LTD Vs. DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX (NVESTIGT. YON) AND OTHERS norted in $994 (207) ITR &S has observed as under: jospoa in the enquiry to be held regarding this stage, ts purpose is to get hole of evident bearing on the tax liability af a person, said person is suspected io fave been witht from the assessing authority and fo get hola assets repre f rundisclosed income. The s resolues tp ie order imposing tox Uaiilit. stage, ail, ft materials fram wohich © is sought fo be inferred . At-the initial stage of search and seizure, t pif the Revenue places 'before.2 cOurh fo exarnune sf verial on which search and selzure Is ordered, £ "relevant to the exercise of the power under vection 132(1): the material placed Jor the court's perusal cannot be disclosed to the petitioner." ad e of in the cas KISANDAS GULABDAS AND SONS -- Vs. STATE OF MYSORE {(1971) 27 STC 434) the Court consicere : reds as (Glows' iB a ri « ie? Fe Euan Gh SICCOLOLES ieatee he rpowild be nol ever! surprise visit along secrched and seized some eccou and ciher documenis uwithoul escribed under the Code If his interiion wes only to opertiy, the Gecounts. if was urmecessary for him to e premises of the petitioner. We have no 'premise: "accoun fs anc other documents, but made it appear were voluntarily giver? (0 nun. PROCEDURE we 3 a '7 EP? rinal uF wed m arches SEE CP £ SE aR REA RN See 7 y ferriit £ & nt " Nt i peo "ho . aS ee Sat set omen Ea pened po son ae ef require any officer suborcdincale to him io make the. > search, arid he shall deliver to sucht suk officer an order in Lorit ved oe he searched, aric » dhe thing for which search fs fo be rmade:~ ane such 'ch for fA reed everest rere feb} EP PRe OPS LOTTs a i} 4 pl Be, ea bey vy vg ate Mg ge ete ite } shail, as far as 'ch. mede under this may be, Sector: ape ayy. record pide tuyider sib- nowvered io take ee 'ser to ine neares Oo CORN ache c COUPER. 1, free of cost, with a copy ef the same by sy stra fe, A Constitution Bench of the Ar of Commissioner of Commercial Taxes Board of Revenue, k Ey ee searches made luder sio-section | SQfeguan Code of Criminal Procedure would not apy py 16 searches under sub-section (2). We cannot See moran? for this assumption. The proviso' b-section, so far as may Pf 3@0: in accordance wlth the prox isions. of the © Criminal Proeedure. . vec gt © ony org bog F be wapplcabie (0 Lm De. provisions "Ure €¢ lL Pouce when the prow SO" the provi Code of © Simin el procedure io all searches made 4 "this sub-section, as far as mt be possibie "Lwe See no.reason why Section 165 should not mutandis io searches (2). We are therefore or Section 16 provided in is are ~ ff) the empowered officer must have reasonable grounds for believing thai a Bs ew) Nath The constitutional validiy of Section 132 was the "subject matter before the Hornble Supreme Court inothe Case, "ot POORAN MAT, Vs. INMRECTOR.. OF INSPECTION -- (INVESTIGATION), INCOME-TAX, NEW ames OTHERS the constitutional validity of the . provides for searc io entrusted ta Income Tax authorities with a vwlew to prevent lerge tax evasion. However a, the measure mould be objectionable mentation isnot aecompanted by is, undue and unproper OpOS LION itis now possib we to . if the safeguards are generally on the "ines. atopled by the Criminal Procedure Code they - apould 'be regarded as adequate and render ine resifictions imposed by the measure In the case just clied there was G pi QUASO io sub-section (2) of section 41 which Seer "prescribe d that all searches under the sub-section so far as may be, made in accordance unt ee the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Ay and perform the iS2i}). The officer so authorised mri. enier orn building or place and make a search where fie reas reason to believe that any books of-accouré or other | documents which m7 Ais opin cae phony ES fp Nib Maal ME or relevant to, any proceeding urederihe Act found, The officer meking a search muy seize any books of accourll or other. documents and place a marks of ideniificaion on.cmiy such, books af account or otfmer ie pe made extracts or" make an u tory Op course of aru search i in Ais opinion teil be useful for, or relevar to, any proceeding under the Acty.and remove them to the income-tax office or -proithit the person in possession from removing them. He meu also examine on oath any person in "posses yf or control of anu books of account or "documents or assets. Phe section does mol confer any arbitrary mutherity upon the revenue officers. The Commissioner or the Director of inspection musi BS ee 3 eR authorization or of the designated rey Popes Pie Pe SP EPPO' seneh osreraec? challenged, the officer concermea mus court about the regularity of his action. zit ? ig mwiliciousiy taken or power vnder. ie ised for a collateral purpose, It és vy the couri, If the eondilions for: exercise of the power proceeding ts lableto be qu is exercised bone fide. requist & belie and for reasons Wieor "useful for any proceeding under the Ac t, (ie court in a petition by an aggre fe -- og ge Bow i fury exy ging £F eet igdgs ry 43° 'he asker? fo suostihle ibs OLUP an order authorising search should Again. any irregivarty i search wid seizure committed by he o Hicer ac of the authorisation "will not be sufficteri the action taken, 'provided the officer has in executing the authorisation acted bona fide. . "ated bos warrant of cuthorisation should specify ine" particulars of documenis and beoks of accournk co. 4 general authorisation to search for and "setze. documents anc books requirements of the Act anc, the e haules. it-is fort officer making (he sevrch fo. exercise his judgment cui. seize or nol fo seize any focuuamieris or beales of accoun, Ar error CO mami a ek documents '€ hy bé your id not to be a i mo ihe proceeding uricder the f piliate the search, nor will it fo an omnibus order The ce jarieve: i party may uncoubtediy move a competent court for an order reieasing ine a proceeding tne officer documents setzed 'who Res made the search will be called uport to the documents seized are likely to be useyil il for or relevant to a proceeding ui wer the Act. 'f he is unable to do so, the court may order that those documents be released. But the circumstance The Act and the Rules do not require thai tre : relevant. iG or: es 4 eo A ee that alerge number of documents have been se is mola qos for nolaing that all documents. 5 eld are Tel By the express terms of the Act ¢ Income fax Olficer may obtain police officer. By sub-section (13) of . we yt Phyo Syed op eaysheaey provisions of the Code of Cromunat relating to searches apply SO for as micap.dbe, to Po as searches under section intended that the offic er concern eel slial! issue the PB esent respectabie necessary. laarrand, sersons Gf Ste locus 4 t mune SS- IN& Be generally, caer out the "Searéh in Crimmnal Procedure. (ul 132 does net imply thal the lind Lc ans s prescribed bi sec 'ocedure are alsa incorporated terein. a 'iB come-tax C Hricer, A-Ward, Agra vp. Pirm ma Mal it spas observed that the (ssue ia7ier is mot a "of a-séarch warrant by the Commis: judicial or a quash a judicial act and even if the Commissioner is enjoined fo issue @ WWerTant Ory sohen in fact there is information in fis possession in consequence of whick he may form (ie necessary { ote "In the instant case, ti is admitted that ine. inspector who searched the car of the pang, had not made any record of any ground on, the } basis of which he had a reasortable belief (hat-an see tuider fhe Ach unis bel afl proceeding fo search the. car cand thus fhe provisions of S.54 were r é te ep ey BL gee ete ge Bee BP Search focal corodary PeTE UL OFrger ie founded. or frivolous prosecution or harassment. appears fo hate ers fhout making any real afliempl fo analyse ihe staf-the provistorts of Sections 53 and 54. The HONS Lwoere i Court observed thar these Nue : wpholhj irrelevant. With cue respect, wwe are tnabie to approve of such a cryptic approach to a legal i 3 f far-reaching consequences." t a L 4 aad Sa a HORE sued on Having recel having reason to believe therefrom posses rT disclosed. Having received ii ocmation. quthorising alfic has to satisfy himisell th t "person is in possession consequence of invormation in: pos of the conditions in tion LS2 exists, ai sub section | of merely on the basis of suspicion or to cevet pane ign d COTICE AIG enquiry te unearth authorising officer is fully lisclosed lead to the discovery of > igguied, Therelore, if nowered officer to record im ee ee eee Fhe n "cau } " ged as a em wom fea - am ef are) ay yen ay Ste ew Sal sooth Pat oP Nac vem. 2 oe Aneel es Ao ah a Mi agp et " me pent ry a at phot ~ posi an jae Sheet ote woe fais] nuns ee Lo Sonne sent 'este a yom pod eg oe a: in > samt ook , get poe ses oot a 'ams Same oad fo em on J { £ wet sent = Need ee fond theme a7 co on ort pak go wet Ay "a - i i june f aS 'ent ry a ou on eH "3 se a i ey % Lat yous oot - aS om pn poi i é So! on ot of po f pohiaad everest Nene! Mat cond if rl coat _ peor ee com cane ot up é nt oP ae Me a " a be md) ew oe eo ae Sent ae po red Sau! Jat wie : Sl no n a pont Sad ten! 2 5, Sayin - Seat a ey od ns Fatal ey Toe wi ~ teen 'oot aot pie nn out end ed s set on pola : Soo Ladi a Sars wet Piet Nae a a 'hat sont pod wal gues sjuone? Fad "pen o aw soe pet oF) fee ep ert : ; "ies a stand ae fant ¢ : Meee! eet 'ron f bea Pol me i -- Bons wel : 2 ay mh pa believe that one or more of the conditions in section 320) The order is in the form of an authorization ee subordinate departmental officer authe search any building or place specified \in- the Lorde een wep sd geen Neg ate exercise Une information. fe r eoriditions for the exercise of the ile must record regsons "for. Farid he must issue an authorization in riges it officer is issuine the authorization oF of ihe challen ged, the officer concerned must satisly the court abou arcnes i?. lv clearly show that the seclion (2) is not arbitrary. thal the power to order sear officers of the this power can only follow' Ga reasol table beliel entertained by such conditi ons mentioned in this connection il may be further oe « (2) of rule 112, the poe Naat! pinks ector of mnspection Or. be. has to record his reasons before the authorisation is issued below. Ub an inmeome-tax Of fat rposes enumerated in {ij to @) in "authori isation is for specific (1), all of which are strictly limited to the object of when money, bullion, efc., is seized the Baca ce eS ee ef Ineome-lax is to make a summary enquiry with aovie Ww igo determine how much of what is seized will add ho woo mick: will have him to cover the estimated tax liability to be returned observing nermal decencies of behavir yUF. requirement 1s. The obvious consequence about the existenc conse quent upon the of réason io pelle information if "and concerned authority is not 2rovisions ol ronteaniplated in the Chapter has to be a valid search. An the necess ary corollary. in such ¥ pier XIV-B would have no application. If the search without jurisdiction. then it would be void ab- exercised lor a collateral purpose fo be a search under aq 5 ue clown DY consequently the an order of APL Pe are, SAPP ERY Lage ASE ch 5 : lich is a sine quo not) for ihe auibhorities to auinoti is illegal anc void, the ynatier. Ub the said jrder would have no requirement of Section I32{1) of the Act is moowered officer recore of Sub Seciion (1) for issuing - oo. ae Bo ge +. a& seizure under the wrelher chose the court mark the conclusion of search and then what will follow is. the seizure or performance of other functions clauses {ili}, fiv) and (v} of stb-se s wf Income Tax Act prov Es eign books of accounts, olner or ofhervaluel GOCLINETHS, TROP Ven, th sets under clause {al of "eg i officer and, sec ae 4 assets jound cCuriris i search asm, on en we oN wet owe jot bad a dene own a davere nol disciosed?. assets found ciusing. search reed v the further verification, authorised officer is in es jee if a Sonnet om fea as v igus sub-section (1) or are undisclosed, then the her urecler sub-section (1) or sub- authorise seciion (3) deperiding on the fact whethe tne, assets. found to be undisclosed curing the search. Hit is practicaple to seize All be seized lindier sio-se clion (1): but if it is otherwise, then an order will 'ander sub-section (3). [It is mianiiest that the ue ob Tort jemi pee faa Teas em, u peed ? on fe van Be fa wn, Lie ad on Newent" ry, wit Freer jot Sa acdenmt ta make a seizure * secl on (1) or to make an attachiment under sub-section (3) is os the discovery of undisclosed "TP Yo undisclosed asset is found curing se 1 action. c sub-section (3) of Section 132. 20. The proviso ricution on the Authorised jewellery or other va Feeerlio mf thin ey enieyere trade of the busiries; engi make a note-or business sand leave ass 26. "= The second proviso to sub section (1) of Section sees _132..0f the Act.provides that whether il is mot possible or or thing avid.rerneve i. to a sale place or volume, wel § Set out im thic authorized offi ve an order on the ror the person who is in imunediate possession or control serve an order on the owner or the persor who is in initeediate possession or control thercel direct be peewee eh ne Loe DPEVIOL heed S permissior.o: such, offic been vested with: the don bo sup section (3) makes of Une order. Explane ig Of an order: the sery be a seizure of such bG6ks of aecount, "other documents, or olner valuable article or thing b-séction (1) of the Act. Such an order is krewr AS Therefore, makes out order. : Pa 'tion (SA) of Section 132 of the Act makes it that ancorder under sub-section(S) shall net be in force for a lad exceeding 60 days from the date of the order. 'the tenor of the ianguage used in the said proviso, it is VM not fo reraove 'or To enilorce- BSE SSL Zo SSS e retain the same for a rec aforesaid staternent of Shri Om -- could) be secived from. Alm on tu wi es F day. Therefore, there are no grouncis to maintain Lad examination of f coming to a finetrug thar (here Lpere reuSans ip uy J f : oF believe that the aforesaid 32 iments-of "annexure "DT or 4 ornaments of annexure "Dy Jf .a9ere Further, undisclosed proper ine Ach or the Rules fo shou. "thet tree ciuthorised officer carp search, urider Nis Ss period ! mers 7 - Ba sme ty oy degh oe ge foi zg TO SUD ~ Seenon [S) 0} the said property under by the provisions contained therein and sonable period. When the Hs ao nue 112A of (he Rules wuire the within JS b-section (5) of ome-tax Officer to record rdev within 9O days from the dete of etc, it can be justly 'said that the said reasonable period during which z the ornaments. etc.. car be reteined? iuvould rol ordinarty exceed GO days from the date of > attachment of ihe same. Atfachmernt of ormcamen ete.. under sub-section (3) of section 132 would necessartity deprive a citizen of use cf the same. he pleases and thereby tf is infraction of his Ube io the free use of the said: ornaments. ? is desirable that the authorised Officer Shout decide (he pretier one >Fy ettachment, ef] haha ection Pai, at ihe eaarlic é BIN presen wyli.pet ip aS file cd. Therefore, in ese circu TISLUNICES, of the allachrnent allegeday made by ihe authorised officers of ihe emarments, etc.. of annexures "D-L "Dell, "D-II and especially when I am of the view that the i wees i OL SE by the provisions of sub- all not be permissible. ht "is indisputable frat this court can. while exercising fhe powers under article 226 of the Constifittion, mould the remedy as u suils fo the facts of a s peen found that Bie "particular case. So. when if hac C., referre dl fo above j See ihe attachment of ornamerits, € ae recount, documents, valuable articles, e€ic., The second proviso to section [3201] alse talks of a ease where it is not practicable to fake PR sic ab. possession of a valuable article oF fRING a 1 Pin i which case an order of resiraintmay be issued pub he second proviso wou uhere if is not practicable'. to valuable -article.for any of four reasons, viZ.. lite fortes. voleane or Loeight or characteristics Ss or due ig-its being of other physic a dangerous © these four. reasons. u wen i |: possession of the sa resireaau order but such a deemed to be seizure of such possession is not taker Ta? . becaus sel it is nol practicable. If if is not pr acticaple tg teice physic al possession of a valuable arc de fo , arly F Feason.other than that provided in the secona Sey re section, 132t1}, then the provision of ~ section: P8213) can be validly invoked e.g.. books of econ or valuable articles wohiieh are liable lo pe "seized may be under a lock and f@ may not be ible fo get physical possession of the same beceuse the key may not pe available. or rendered rmugatory by revoking an order under 32(S) and thereafier pc wag" tre be Nave granted approval under sub-section /SA). Wiiet-oas done in the present. cel the order F ? dated February 11.199 then to poss < that very a aparoeal of the Commissioner of Income Lex: sOughi. Phe same thing happened ne e a Pye AF ey , ee yey b peg peg ed 7 ee PRSEBE on Jurie ©). 199]. 'Che order urider Section 132(5) extended tiotee without aru the eorunisstoner of incorne-tax concurrence Ire cane. merety.on the Assistant Director of Income-tax u corger, The provisions of siub-section (GA) of section G2 were Wiereby circumvented. ler section Un aur opinion, orice an order un 713) has been passed, then the limitation period comrnences ana Such order cannet be coruinuec [_- Be unless and tnil the provisions of section 132(3A.--~ are satisfied." The Allahabad High Court in the ; case af SRIRAM JAFSWAL Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND _ OTHERS | reported i 1989 (176) ITR 261 has held as ander: Then, we come fo tne. iva whether an order under et Pe Wij pioed Cees on Wide SP "Fm oh af pds ope iS CSse hosed OP Ui ss? ole Be ch. £6 find our fhe true Le will have lo di é S32, Stib-sect) OY? a fl). se. Far % 1s 'releue anit fer our purposes, reac that as specified in sub- oak coer EE 4. Pari Bad poe Fg a PES ae uuhiere the authorising -office eee a eee eee ype} fe sey r a secuon (1) Of section i132, tft consequence o] hes reason fo believe sian wn x af Ura Sea as, Pe Me af ee, a a pres a ed owe mee is in possession of any money, ery or olher valucaple article or thing as ouch, money, builior, jewellery oor other lucite e article or thing represents either wholly or partly Income or property which has not been, or "Lvould rofl be. disclosed for the purposes of the Act of 1961, then the authorised officer, as specified] in clause [aj of sub-section (1). muny seize any such,» books of account, other docuinents, roney, bullion. Jewellery or other valuable article or thin Ge out das So, the requirement it of a resull of such section the authorizing of} -- nist: be in possession of U Yormation rot 'amounting to mere pretence or suspicion Dub. Suastar information on the -hasis of: which he couid..kaue reason lo belleve het CUPL] pereort-is th DOSSeSSIOr of ary asset. as men tioned in cla he person aboul een recelped. 1s in ' sit clause fly) of sub-section (1) clearly sheios inal the assets as mentioned in wired in clause je) Thus, wheat can be seized wurder he purpose of the Income-lax Act. Some courts took the view thar seizure means flaking physical possession & any vudluable article or thing. To overcome this, the Legislature has amended section Be 76 orders Section & CASE of dee nde a seizure Cae bso H proviso to sub-section (1) of Section | 34. In the case of Bb loc! kK. Assessment. the -As: sed, incor ie af the block period in, accordance > wits Sment aj of such asse to lax the salad income by imposing tax. Under the Scheme of the block assessment as is SCOPE OF APPEAL 3D. The contention of the revenue is that the Tribune cannot look into the validiiv o search as conducted, under the provisions of Section 132 of the Act. as.the Tributral | ing ary action appeal to the assessee would not it search. The he actions of the the conditions to bé salisfied as prescribed in clauses {aj to (c) of section lege) cormotelion, tne word the party making we -- sea im search, and, therefore. a search can be said to have begun "commenced when the first act to enter the premises is taken jurisdiction or competence to look nto this aspect: ~°, Right of the search party. authorities prior to the Ha woud be beyond the pale expression 'where a search is iniliated or. the expression 'whe any search is conducted AIV- of the Act. Righi uy DYior with the 'fore the High Court in writ sristif{ution of Ind ihe gunal has to confine ssing Ollicer or can it go oss of the proceeding commencing from a search under section 132 which ultimatel orders. Clause (5) of sub-section 1 ef Section ey a BO requisitioned uncer the 30° day of June, 1995, but-hefore.». 1é 18 day of Jaruary, 1997:or (bQ) ar order passed by an Officer under st: 'D- section (1) of font an order" passed: { bay a Corbnon under or lruler clause fui) of " Seetion 2F] or Séetion 26 an . urider Sect Or arp order him under Section 154 order under Section 263 OF an. Order passed by a Chief Conuni issioner or a Director General or a Director under Section 272A, ar" 204 deals with orders which could he -passed by the Appellate Tribunal. Sub-section (1) of Section ve peep jo oy # Sei mas oy drs mont Sa met Coe _ toe part ies to the appeal an opportunity of being such orders tnereon as it thinks fit Section 255 deais procedure of the Appellate Tribunal. It provides for'constife of the Benches im all circumstances;-a member or-unoresident an dispose of the mialler im Suchh-a raanner. and be decided accordin prov ides Tribunal 'a procedure and brie treol in AH matters arising oul of € charge ol its functions, coven vey a edb MESS CLL AAS PCY? ar as the powers of io the income 31 and any e Tribunal sha Lhe deemed to be ¢ tne meaning of Sections 193 and 228 and jor the purpose of section 196 of the Indian Penal Code and the Appellate Tribunal shall be deemed to be a civil court forall the - purposes of Section 195 and Chapter XxXX¥V of the Code 'of Gedis wiltr tte Criminal Procedure. Sub-Section (6) {)} i, for the purpose of discharging iis. functions: powers ww! care cested mt fhe amicome fax auihoriies repferrec. to | bejore te deemed io bea judicial; secing unthin the meaning of. Sectioi and 228 and for ey te ee f° DUrpose of to be a Clo Court for all the purposes 495 and Chapter XXXV of the Code of Crimine! Procedure, 1S98(5 of 1898) BO, . . Phe Revenuc in support of their contention reued wu The fudement of the Special Genen in tne case of PROMAIN LED. VS. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & reported in (2005)1995 ITD 48g (DethixSB), xhies re ih "oot oh 2 question referred fo the full bench was as under * tne income Fax appe lat e Ty fpuped acjuctoale Upor issue retating to. Of search coneliucted wuider. Section" Page again st block cssessimiery 7 After various decisions, i inder read together, tf would earch, the actual carrying and completion of search. Therefor valielity of search, referred io for | ideraiion 1 Of tne Special Bench has to be ryt. x LOL reference LO the cicbuel cormmencement of the search » Conductrg of search and final execution of search ine powers/functions/duties of -- the ) Officer wider the provisions of Chapter 4 fee a of appeal is conferred on the agarieved party. Ip sio. right of appeal is cariferred agamist any a tex authorities. then such ar -actior® c challenged before the Hor ble High. Court i: turif opetifion under Arte DOR Pf BOS '6 foo the Constitution of Indic. required fo searen: oni cled in the satisfy hime iP olr case OF py aSSE. "Ss: sce ant irofaied afler 30-06-1995 and noth ies wore. Another aspect of search which Assessing Officer is the we is: fo pe' -Seert- "bi norization as provided in section: 1588 relevant only for the purpose srtaining the period of limitation for kasi aspect o} ai which isto be seen by the Assessing Office! PS o rest Teferetice to the eulderice - "loin section ISSGE. This is eU idence ubhich is found as a result of search and such other material which is relatable io such evidence. Apart from these requiremer, hyp be oF a would Be be yord the pale of expre: ae Go Assessing Officer is not required fo see any offer" as of aud ~~ os aspect of the search. A valid search is the foundation for nutsdiction to meke ihe block cssessine provisions of Chepler Al eb. We are upable to'. accept Uils coniention jor the "reason inai ihe right oF appeal fo the assessee as u rel asthe poiwers of the fee fo the actions as prescribed in clauses fei) fo - initiation of: the search. According to the legal means lo begin or io COPTIOLE Wien, ihe nerd Cini COMUTIENCE. a "eearch is-a physical act ef the party making searen @ rl, verefore, a search can be said gencor e corunenced usher the first act to fo have' center the prenuses is token by the search party. ae Therefore. in our huomble opinion, anything done by come: fax couhorities prior to the take achon z ior, uliere a . a few dor dedes dey dt - Laas ge py ' Ley apts oF Search is pudatec: or te @8xPressior "unere di ty search is conducted' used by the Legislature in Chapter X1V-09 Gf the Act VioLider pe. es L SESS aE Cae Wamp nt . A + fy ges Mt Na tlm, Bod SP hed = ei " meh rot _ fh . a pov Pete AG oy "at Pa haat at "ia oie an, 2 one 'a! od Nae pod : Sema fmt Mead eat ye fr, pod poe at eed Brow Sa at fee hen Sie ; mad Po ae is Panny 1 teat ane : . oe SOS = 8 Net pus? = om, ees ae ina Mita, Dt : vo May rm af "ad 7 pos pos oe ns ote Nee? s, se a un "on =~ "ee Png Saat eo, 6 r awe md - fia NO "ht Be 'iad ou a ~ ist 2 ed § Sar at * Hetetna pte Seed they "Son Nd a ah pus } oa ey e re! nae L ad Nd oot tie ay Thee * cut oven el wrt, nb: an ' = os mee H so eS ion el whe, al eel Sa oe heel id a port a ra " Seven ca Fama l Rv we os alee Ft sig oad 'i sj Prd a ri Nene onl Prd io pe ie ; Poe Ay Se acd baie ee "oot Sau . oe! sep pe ia . phwe cad . vee : oy row ee pe - pew By eee nad Set vat yen pest fad f Seni a on see of coe Sein Jeg pnt ae ee pawu nd a have further held that if such an action is arbitrary ane assessee is he Ras th ne re medy bf challenging the said action by way ol wrif petition urder Article 'efore, they held. what could be the subject matter of aw writ pe tit 1OT) earrot be tne : provision under the the assessment in the case of MLB. LAL VS. sect co MMISSION? ER OF INCOME-TAX reported in (2065) 279 rR : 298 @ethi). Following tne impugned judgment in this CASe ur which deals with assessment merely "as. computation of income is section 23; but several ~~ SE ions deal not with computation of income. but determination of liabiiay, mactimert for iny ability, and the procedure in that behalf." Section my 3. 2 til - 3 rs yeh ISA deals with adpance fey y rriposition of penalties for fallin provisions thereit. Section CLE ibe rs of ceric din he COMpanies Sfributed as divided, sections dex eased persoris, section 25 deals ouath i* El i assessment. Moccase of. discontinued business, section 25A with. sessment after partition of , Frotelit undivided i families and sections 29. 31, 33 'appeals and Jor: revietwiig assessment sirient of gncarnes fea 24 dedis wtih asses oh Rave escaped assessment. The expression fries oe ae Pocd Fron Oey hes "assessment" used in these sections is not used merely in tne sense of computation of income and there is in oly judgment no ground for hoiding that when by s 44. itis declared thal the pariners : ae DOS Be -upare: taxpayers guilty of fraud, gre comin 93 has inadvertently refuted, di is tmnplictt in the corfention appellant thal it is open to the pariners.af a firm guilty of conduct exposing section 28 to evade pena Chogry he nns oF unambiguous teu the interiion of the bez In interpretieg a fi iclermctes tf Giere be any: in rerpret ne 'Statute as if stones at in, a manner r favourahie to the enit case, by the = the prese Lapeer. iu ee ah Ore. :. use Of 4 Cat vale of comprehensive import, provision is male f for imposing Lability for penalty Uigence or is conduct, an assumption (hat Ue used in a restricted sense so as to > avowed object of the Legisiature qua a oll riot be lightly made." we 4 \ int the Act starids EG ES RES UIE SSSI SET SSS refore the word assessment fas beer used ¥ The times the com ape: static Fe commolation. Wis used as mean of income, some times determination ol the aiiount: of tex payable. and someé times the whole procedure ae Act imposing liability upon the 1. e, the word. assessment encompasses the. délermina "oeedure im that machinery for imposine in appeal ies. jainst. such. order : Court in » the case, of COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VE. _ASHC KA ENGINEERING CO. reported in aining how appeal provision ITR (Vel. 194)1992 Pp 648, - sole should be constiucd, held a as under: Phe atest on at issue is regarding a right of appeal. ois ie that there is no iviereni "oi ol pees fo 4 "ipords of the idl ing for earl + appeal. But if is an equally + well-settled proposition: of law that, if there is a provision conferring a right of appeal, it should be reac in a reasonable, practical +34 and liberal manner. Naving considered ihe fied. which have been placed before us, we. agree with the cases which have taken ihe vi thar the cases before us cart he meated as Cases". wohere the application. or. ile taration iG GE invorde re and is consequenily rejected. 'This construc 'On not place aru unde straiire. on the langitecje op a ied that, even oan application is. filled. before. ihe: income-tax i straightaway reject ii He uill have to give an fo show cause as to Sometimes, even his Jo be wrong. If the assessee satisfies ie Income (ax r that there was sufficient couse. then the erfdined bu the Incorme- in "other words, the defect that the + "application was beyond Hme stands remedied and ob The Apex Court, in the case of INCOME TAX 'OF PPICER, CANNANORE Vs. MB. MOHAMMED AUUNHI, reported in GR (Vol.74) 1969 P.815, dealing with ine.sco} De Sof the. sheldasu Tribunal is net a COurt, Pee powers. The Tyil pimall's powers ia oh ealir iq with : itude: anid Wave in appeals SONNE CUSES rile joan ide nied roirh the porbers ae f uider tne Procecliire | . : ""ipapas seid. fhat the general principie was hei in a faxing stetute there was no room for what could be call the equitable construction, bul that ie applied only to the taxing part of the 7 . Stattite- ard not to the procedural part. It has further a beer abiserved that Sess ais ry an. Appellate Tribunal iwilh powers to prevent an ¥F impliediy) empowers tt to stay the Bey EYLSce, Preeeegngs which may resiuli in causing further INCOME TAX, NEW DELHI (CENTRAL) Vs. EDWARD KEVENTER (SUCCESSORS) P.LTD.. reported iit ITR Vv OLUME iZs3 particular, with references to in ISSO page 200 dealing with the sc ayy under: awith-each other (ough naturally LuNeTe cerle i the same me OF are i er. like ad. iney should be considére Oh r ard ihe scape af the subject- bunal-sheuld be construed fom might be different ; s.0f appeal are dealt with by the BAC, whice heve no real interconnection cul becir "port pa dcular assessment and though they may au proce relate to the compuiation of income ivhere there are inter-connected grounds o! rom. the same head of source. Put in « case 4 appect 4 and they have impact on the same . Subjec ct mnaiter, the scope of the appeal should be broadly considered in the correct perspective, ' i of the benefit given to him bu the lower authority where the other side has-.nct-- res should moe : oy doy oe ee ee en re vege oe be interpreted OF CP Dged SO GS. OO confer on cart i appellant a relief to which: fee cannot be eniilice fhe potris decided in his - matter by the lower court ore diso considel ed 2s requested by ihe respondent. 'the said question. "the Rajasthan High of COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX Vs. SMT. CHITRA DEVI SONI reported in 2009 (213) ITR 174 at paragraph tO and 11 "A e above quoted clauses in plemt of the cat * wt rat fone > a fh a at Son Wy Search i "then", that the action of authorisi mider clouse {A} and nas Of necessity provided he requirements fo be preceded by the existence Lf EE ; . a a Sa ee ee ne vege gos eed nue tyes of Gre other part of said section, as quoted above. ver words, existence of reason fo believe, it Birt te be consequence of information in possession of the "assessment in the pre oR roentioned in OMG OF CLR: fo entitle the auihority fo make aichorisatior L Yas required by clauses (A) and. {By The: consequence is thet if Sie. requiverr section (1) about the existence of Ure reason. fo believe, consequery, Lore me "informa possession of the -« satisfied there could pos mn, fhe search ho ureder section 132 by provisions af section The above being the legal position, since the ig mode teider and upnen if was specifically -. ait rr ob ged by the assessee. that the circumstarc 'contemplated by section 132(1) did not exist, this is "aoamwatter which goes to the root af the matier about diction of the assessing authority to proc eed oe 'aie ~~ good, & reba HO under Chapter XIV-B, the Tribunal was very much justified. and fad jurisdiction fo ge iia thee 0 question as to whether the search was contiiciec consequent upon the atithorisanorn. hewing been issued in the background eventualities and material n 1820}. We are conscious of the fac oper fo us or the enurt (oy suffictertcy competen had e) atertained the reason tot eUeTIILLE ag ie@stion. - HEI teri al . to information in his authority is the ynatier irech can < Pribunal: so also by this court as the absence would - vitiate the enire action." another Division Bench of Raja: "the Case of KUSUM LATA Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME "TAK rep orted in 1989 (180) ITR 365 has held as under iach oy Me a VOLT COAMPMOl GO ITH the information or ihe material At seen is. as fo tohether samme material, existed or mot for HOP Gn Lo hape the reason to believe fab ary persan is possession of any undisclosed ine Opuiousiy as fo whether the clrcurnsian contemplated by clauses fap ti ii there is a provision ne read in a reasonabie, SLPRe s-been held similar to and identical with the powers of an re Court under the Civil Procedure Coc (AAC: A mere search or seizure, by itself would not result tp ESSE aaa oe ae search and seizure: re The seit Hablity anc order. Then peal provided uncer tne statute. In other wards: ye hon of search and ¢ arciy arid] seizure culminate ro 5 Yi pest = ead Such unautno aih aAaSe SITET ©! ass Sut Op GUSLDO cfFics & nent could have been passed. Though the authorisation the material collected and oF iplock abinitio. That is a ground available to the assessce torch order in be <a proved irregularity in conducting search and-seizure may. not seeasirient order, but the very initiation of the procecs without jurisdiction, void and con: uid also oe: is not a curable defect. [tis netvoidabie al the option "d the same by way of nstitulion, he would not lose his r cannot be arn.c useful to notice te oP cearek initeted oO) Search ITMlerea fo search initiated under the Courl any, the Be o oe SeOLR De. ne EEE, anpedl ow Seve pol 2m bent m 2 oe pe Gren om wd CO Ex uy coed om inary ie + Fe fet a _ jobs _-- sang me o * enUre proceedings based on stich oon) qas rio legs to stand. End A TEE, ose teerpe DEY eee AES. Doerefore, in an ae assessment orcer, i this foundat Therefore, ib into the jurisd 7 searen was valid beck assessment. Therefore, i correctness of. cannot be said im Pol a writ petition under Article 226 of fe ol a specitic provision eal apainsl such orders, im the "pont St! ome i "= Sat i pod oy Samohi ~ 2 e en ~ fae on wel a on om D fos i ines pool ~ 9 » a _ _ om cae Nea as oa sg toni Fie Sager a PI Sa spped from going into such question. 46. The Apex Court in the case o { POORAN MAL vs. 7 DIRECTOR OF INSPECTION (INVESTIGATIO! Me INCOME-TAX NEW DELHT AND OTHERS reported ith Vol.93 ire P.505, has ™ evel assuring inat the rch are Seizure were in roan vontravertion of provisions. of $ law belore tne whose custocl ito the pre >pOst Lic place the prov ssiment was not hy the statute on the day the said vered.by-the Apex Court. Secondly. prior te judgment was.deti assessinent for an bois in inat ioweas. eld, even covered: Curing such legal search and seizure could assessment and act, but that De joomed Into for the purposes of : of block assessment. Even if a return is is nol possible in be declared as illegal is iooked into. stilhihe order of assessment passed in this proceedings would bea initiation of the proc ecdings is void. Th the illegal search and seizure would' the assessment proceedin assessment proceedings ay. assessment o1 vitialed because SC) OTL, the returns ff materials sec ur red: during. tne dlegal search and seizure is, SLLOSLaAN ce, without any RE: LIMITATION boo 47, "Seetion bS80C prescribes the procedure for block EN RABE asses smert. Section LS8BE of the Act prescripes the time limit section, the commencement of the period of limitatio SSS EEA ea re See var from tne enc of the month in one ¥ authorization for search under Section Therefore, iniplies there coukh be aulnorivalion urcer Section 13201) of ihe A than one authorization, the starting point of liral allons. Texplanation 2 to computed fron thorization referred to cuted in the case of searck dna earch as recorded in the € last panchanania.< case the warrant ¢ Soe ey ped ve gy 's o BuULMOMSalorn us how Ho shal have been executed. Tf is because, when law s for more tnarn one authorisation, tne Hmitation is to be ~cemputed from the date of the last of the is executed. If the authorisations are executed + conducted on different dates. there will be Pah hangings On diferent dates. A deubt may arise commencement of the day computed. In order to remove thée.said doubt this-explanation: uD As oo om he rs, ided by Finance (No.2) A 'Therefor e there cannot be speck of Lhe authorisati Jrom the word "lust of the "the main section. The word used is 45. ¢. . Avsearch and seizure under the said Act has to be "farried out in the presence of at least two respectable tne locality where the search and seizure is on Sout ia, oot feel -Goncucted. These respectable inhabitants are witnesses fo the Ceo EC are known as decuimentation of inev witness is known. panchanaima, The word "nama", 'document, SO panichanama jis a written record of what the panch: has witnessed. In Mohan Lal v. Emperar, AIR observed that what a Ually a document recording cerlain things WICK are see TAS GS seen py them and of fappens in the pr pul a document pened in the presence of the witnesses may document the search fhe panchanama that is mentioned in (Hanafion Zia} to section IBSIBE is a panchanama whi ine conclusion of a search. Clearly, if a .panchanama does not, from the fac s recorded the ES a CSS SIRS SSS RS Ss Ss Ae or 29 ifthe month is February, 3¢ or 398, depending on che rumber of days in the month. What is io be recor Pancharmma is that the ceampenpuby Pueypes og SEAPEY) OSCAause Panchanama may not be aware o Pr Marches they may not be the Panchas who e search and igure ort thal date. ~-fmec recording conclusion of search, if there:are more than one authorisation and more aon Lo such authorisation, woich bby ep ay pueiga Thee ye whee ee vente, fg tnan one Panchanarmns ing ation for the purpose of computing vext question for consideration is. when once of the authorization enters og pk ond ong pod gn eeppreateibs beget grees es ard SlariS Se@arcrimg, Wie comes to an end. i is contended on behalf of the tion is vested with such authoriged officer . Revenue that a discr i a we of tne warrant of ery ese to complete the search, draw a panchanama statif search is completed on the day he begins the any reasons it is not possible lo conmpiete ' " id then fix ariothe iollory order date for continuing such pherealler;-~ at his convenience and discretion, ai COTULL restraint consider of the various ersuarte jr REG WERE ZL PLES LOE PLAT bs A this country. and the law on this point is well settled. penne ( the Tneame Tax Tribunal P Investinient and Pinance Limited Execution of auinor actual tmplementatior "E officials aulherisation act anci 900KcS OF account, documents are icept are and 86.0n,, a searcivis conducted on a persort bec stacked monet, baillion, jet GP #! SS Of accourll or documents ing anc ron if dred PPR Re ry ah fat Meeg BE Ai is nat correc, ~ This being the intention, the party w Gudlieriseci (oe carry oul the search has fo ensure of ine above or any clive af search, if _is necessary that the search is carried out at one Sfeich and completed. Because the volurne of the items searched is so large compared to the 5 By E number of officials deputed, it may not he™ practcabie to complete the search in one das ane by sealing the premises searched i aE eis loe de _ and seal. The search is st farted ininediately v1 the following day and co: npleted mith. he seizure ps af terns that is carried by ihe p uty Corr ie eonductin g search leave the jpr COM YE WG otner | Her "Ss noted Ain nM ine premises are nol selzed.matertal, » horiserion e&. prepared but ttivas decided not to act on eOPrSsoOn cid ¥ a 1 perform what ail they 132 of the act inchiding f "selaive of books, ete. the purpose of the atitherisation is served. Therefore. if could be 'concluded that the fe of the authorisation starts ~ivith its issue and ends with ifs implementation or action by the officials resulting in seizure of iz Gg i books, documents, PROPLOU and so on. been observed earlier, the purpose of searc! locate the undisclosed income with power. tc Seize books, documents, monet ded Wat ihe se are tt is complete with the seizure of. the (ferns o6. The counsel for the revienie that orice offictals the search... frac. started. ide that mo more search is called search is aa if: = some. Heras on search and fad setzed them and had talk "the premises, they hed exhausted the bop pra ytpiny a noe, iG Carryy Ou tne search. This is ebuious because, the search iusdas Popes based or an information on which a beli formed that a person is in possession of books, searched,' ihe = search ee represel "aquihorised fo search Sstric etc.. that show income or property that is noe - disclosed or that would mol be discloserci' CHR a ening on this belief, the autho prenuses and seizing (ems. I is quite HOSS! a that at the tine of formation. at pelief, t may nob nave a clear picn : ciboui ine form | iufiuicn the wupiaise etna. be fourtd Prt zr merely because, match ung CACC urdisclosec oP fo mean that mean inuing ard if woill end open jor rch despite the fact ihat the lo Find tem that me, [order to mele "Sure that the authorised officials who are elnpewered to initiate a search and the officials conform fo ihe pur 908e for which search is permitted under the 4 At, he preamble provisions, namely, need by acton taken jy searching te . OF INCOME TAX AND ANOTHER reported in (1999) 3 237 iTR & Uriler:- 7O] held "The second undisputed fact is thart narch was" cisconiinued on October and é the gup of 14 days is hardly LO wincing. ai rund Proseditre Code or in for pestpona iq the SSPiPereairicniioy) fy iat wher. 'once the "setirc starts Hoco. go on of search would be ¥ egonisi Fe. ie th is case conside ering the nature of lg 5 pathes | the ile SCASEAT L. 6 Eb coule t I iot be continued nrumediately. There ts no bar for ihe operation to contirne on holidays. The absence of the petitioners in the house is nothing Sul @ lame excuse. If the respondents wanted the operation lo be continued there are taus to 3 ees od ein oe pny Need Pa V set f 5. Li relive D fer OP eat oe olhe pout PESETIOCE a 2 2° rep cre een fons 'sae! ed ree pie i 4 Ee f 4 T ee i LA cae rain or shime. There is no bar for the operation fo cont Tuer OILTIG ot ire oo £ urched or on account of dhe volume OF Lune artic: continue search beyond 24 spigntion starts wilh ifs issue the officials resulting in seizure exhausted the power under the authorisation to carry out the ; _ search, Otherwise it would lead to a shuation whe person is searched. his premises 1s corliniuoushy officers to search despite the fact fhal the search: party %s come. Then iis fearing. bes ee A by endee eee Sn yey . te lav their lars mmeome oO it is adjourned for on the adjou to section 1323f1) deals uf " on " pet merged vad pan seo rs v "When in the course of search, if is not possible io..seize for the reasons selout im the afore proviso}? See He ees REP yracticable to take ph ve or | fab where if is not sion of any ve (b) Remove it to a sale place due to. fe} Other physical characteristics: fd) Upue te tie lage-rec 1 other "material which he could not take acer in eircumstances rot OE a "these provisions, if is open lor him to pass a orohibitory order j i : : : -- See ae Ha eS aR UR emery shewnd sep get oy ea Nod 'ne we -- det ant fiat vee ed a Xe! ae on, ' x : foe Ne 'set 8 = "reat Ele Eon yout aed ep frou sheen! su Ce mot ee eer whe Sa J -- oss ie sph el Sie Seem El fo ay fa x il a gust road a om seas 4 op uo omen nl pened tn ay n3 ere) faa) sydney ve om Ay Set fa) pee gg ie nied Framed sow = wn a . eine ceed Ja od RY wad equ Now rvs San Fagen + a rot ome food pert a =, ao wend al 'ow ae pre C3 nd Sood ee 'oa on . et ? Fret! eN apn as Se ee woh pene 4 Sd porrunt and Naw poet a cn a od bys ERE YES a 'a = - iT sned seigure, ii amounts to deemed possession, .. Z in your possession is to be looked into to find out, Wielerial. % ior postponing the search lor a long. period. ol search as 3 era made applicable 'isation fis pocket like a season ticket and go on whims and fancies. it the assessee conferred han required or nece Ba Ce UA AC SS eae = * " a ee 28 ees oo so a A : ae jpaluoot : " 5 = : ms ) : . sp Sagat "rroe, E | Soot - : : ' : i : : ht i _ : o of " So c et na S wth ie et 2 # : : a3 fon zs Ge ie Faint : what : "a i mm | ae "evewdd gy 7 BS St pene Aye mo oe a sp ovis : E peng HE c SOC TICE € - 8 - ak HUE ent earei tia Mee cae na SRR ORNRNRCRREN ra] al eta, su res ue "ia! we we ye spa ge ei © wo petlewd een ee? Sait jot ostent son re q a pont een ch ba id on rena aa Koel pnd Sad nd a "a oo pow a 'aul ca gest pen anon smal cred é wa oy prot ca + Sone Snot Sion ' ym, Sant Noct ' sent ue fer ea : ft Sows wg mae m4 bee fee ° € gal Sbast oon . ue Shak om ret ramet By . f Mee rs é eo a -- : " Fan gee prea a, tent Chat 3 wf ond £5 + 'a oy rey wet ose ase od ea, whe ae ae a aS on gy oy vuod ' is i ie Sou me os * be AG af ay oS "aot a Noel i set wend we be, yen a eu ra ay cao < - wy - o a ~ a5 " he Sot cond svn set a on ae) = ° PP. pee 4 "se "au ee ce rs She ay gm cl if at sant foot 5 a BAe A hed ay ' os a on o ry - a + on ' ? ot pict ped Sea Pore a pen : osal on heb Pare Lf a x "~ ; oS ceil He eodot oS _ ss ag : x et po ~e Riel land ; Sot le n oy pon Of f a an a ' wm pe wee one -- a eet af mu pone a es) pot pu Seuobed aA spn es aes! ~ a a , ay Co et a pet Juang eed is vege Sane! oe 45 . spay vied " Em oy poet! Sd ee) Na ne ~ a 1 : os par po ; whe os a ; Py po & a7 Qo ' a3 ote, vivo os of tet _-- ye aa ves Qo at oot pened a ht Neat 'al fees io -- pre Sa Sat Cd pe wen het ef i ry dew att pend { Nose! vt Bren rf oe ae) dest Bae a . aa ay s Soot eh soot Soe! en ae a oye ao Nua hm dy pala so tebe 'eal! 4 oS) : ; - S pat St we ' ei a ben ood Sag a veal Sound feos sa i sot apm tad ae com pert : a8) << a ed ae Same ood n vey my, . AG wH een . of) wri oe Py Sd faa - Shaul got ped 4 ip ae) Sew! mi eo iret be ia . nnd 6 Qe event Ben found Sh i a oe wat ve ap se ut ' va 2 cw josh 3 i get raat f : Siw! > pe Sot we Jon oy gon oo ey vied os a es pod bet nut oy ont Seo pas = net oe on ae os ooh A na ia a3 ont Spee! sc A Sat . en ms -- fod can ey g's " a Set Fel a 7 vy fet an oN mre 'ine geet Mae = dent oe etl © t "othe eet 'dou? ae Jung of an As ai ne ray 2 Smt \ phen oe Soa? Eine pel bent ood "n ea ae ass an sits a " Qf rs pa i ; ae ne i fi Saw! go fe va fet 8 apg, pe Me hie ee nal jue Saal mon pov rn Hs "na 4 : " o ote at ed od an Sod ped oe 'a of fed ei moons ro to steed ey spent St -- . 5: =, pol & sii? spon 4 gohverd ot bod Nf # ee Eomens payeont iw Path ne . ao i ied "S bgt we 5 oe =~ tad an yeood oo a em as ene fa Sto Pore ae 4 tp iin ah wipes em. ae) if - eet aay 4 i oe jen sind ee bad Sat u,3 my Re 'al 2 ot : "we = St Xa! jot rot a faaed al pee fon Fain pe fans feuat oe at 3S i, rein as) J phent ames) "hae aa 'is mot a deemed seizure. ing material is found a are the four contin BETICICS - happen after the authorised officer e1 forders were pa: in respect of the s . i. 3 t on yey ete 2 AW OFCEPsS LC Soda cy Py pane mend when tise premises. Once .he comes: wrisaflon comes to an siscof ime. in law he is poe, " por of inspection of the subject order or the rest he Fas mio ju ier jails which are rye 78 OM 3 ce : t i 2 b R Dog ey ge te EOE Some ey eet fey ae wight, by Be As he is not entering the premises again with the int 1, net for the purpose of eee Ss oN eS RRS ce Me i der Seclien e Act is wot necessary. wa sane? f ed ne She jaan ans yt eo il yen he a A ee = ae £3 j a BELL the co wee ee va CSS Oe az eer rp my OH 4 y HS ye euthorises Pant t "an t So fo Sui cation orm " E £ a AS provided, fan) » ry 0 z£ eno i ioe ot Jo 2 Set Be! P + ood Sine onprt St pot £3 eal vp Sad re ow yee Jae Sous + Fest A "be wien nea dosauael UTES ag MASSES b afer such inspection would be the undisclosed Income lor the gx (10) Whether nothing incriminating material is found ape) "nO selzure is the said section specilic: anc Section 132 speciical | i search and it has "LG: premises which aro ohibltory order or restraint orders of thase ee a Bf TLC AISO OPpowel material after entering the premises © actions only f prohibitory order or restraint order. be premises over again. Any Wide i ; bee ere 4 L LPpOSe © p iOTl £ tal aml pus, required to be authorized through L other words, search authorisation should .authorize looked into for the purpose "ol> authorisation on ine same day. Tren authorisaviors 'of imitation. When all the aulhorisalions ere will be one Panchanama in reve The authorisations may be 4 ofeach Suck Then the doubi would arise fg Den LL sooty erg ey ee bree Wis ime one year irom the end of tae month ia which jhe last of the authorisations Ao mas executed, nm the same day. then the last Panchanama draw 1p io the warrant of authori Po ie period commences from the end of U ation, ime law be ELiGGPTL, £228 ehy ce of the auchoris officer to visit the premises for. the material "which 'sap ther of lintitation stal as otnerwl concluded as-ev mnitroduced woud 772 dated 23° December 1998 position as un According te Section ISSBE, limitanon op z years has to be courted from the end of the morin Lise of the word 'quthorisations: riore fhar one authorisation. Supposingly-. auihorizations are issued one ine 'other % ar Jd the lasi a shite the? authorisation issued earlie! is CXL 'te ae] lateron. in ch De courted from i of the Fast dele Of ISSuc Ol. ine wlier and rol 5 from the executionof the garlter a irorisedtion, i fater 7) EX. plane Lhd OLE S Pinarce. ( Bor the removal of dowubis, i a Bek & i 2 elerre or] o hape been pond. fl) shall be deerned ng ea sey een peed og od Ce Las "is FeO ded im tne parich vaname cUraiorn in relation fo any er issieed 5 oe P40) FON Aa er section cin po freon wed wud pew thoes ms aap & er COCLUITeTti rt AAT NNN poe yeni as hogs ie a 'be 'aad Pi me ie stele ed So etal stem Fe ran Bond tab pout cred a pin, Ned stage wend Nal po Sea * pl pind ne 'fs Fase saad po nn iad is Saal i whet a pel ha 5 t pr Mma aN hat wr] Mat ! Fiewsit a Soe Be Eee! ea uy 'neg ok Sid aes oe me pos Beet, Stem Yin hee "inal ° im oo F " 'pa, oe . Nie git fines Pai vated wheel 'hia? pen PUB et eet howd nee yr oe is hat foot! Pe " _ wif uw S x ~~ pod : Bas Oto, Se + Ue a oS = ani " ee on as OM ie; Sota, sped Pat iat a at San Net pont et poh ae spout Seant zm 2 eo iia a eet im me pot Preto ioe awe = Boy n "i ie Me if pt a Foe umes Uta a _--, 4 "oat an a nev "rot os my ee "wal ' wnt a Fo fast Aaed ¢ toon "pica? sep cat aed a issued once, the authorisec premises uncer the in pursuance of eommences, if comes fo ney the atl premises afler comr search he visi aipopiect mabier. OF res~ranil OFQEr OF . : orohibliory ore panchanama is written, that would not 5 be looked into for the 4 Ei be the panche purpose of-.comy cuch a Panchanama would mot ihe period of limitation. I is because The imitation is U proceedings are not & wr BOE within the time prescribed. the would acquire a valuable right. mercy of the officials, who do sub aMive provision SCLALITE. search What can be Ss. whether ror Cor pletic ron eae? missing in the said Section. The same carinot be read into the "Section for the purpose of limitation. Then it amounts to re- Oe ee ae The aforesaid circular No. dilemma faced by the Department. ec off to perform all ce ane signe a contract: # te" "execulion" is defined at page « jonery as fouoLws: completion Cormmissioner } completion of an acl: pulling \ "110 F.2D 286 to = Ae ff f ie, anything or carrying out into operanion © und eflect, ie c process. i aChore 2e-or judgment: aite effect the directions ina aec Foust Foust, 47 Cal 2p lai e. if. : ine words argue that formed, tne went LEPOFL resiainl order oF treated as vevebuion? of the warrant, Bur i be hypertechnical and ; intel pretanr el 3 a, Py raat od oe pt iy = me a, fen 'detoited discussion das is rae ge paras. other execulion The question arises as fo i.e of a warrant of authorisation or requisii - 2 gat ovedderere apne dor the conchision of the proceecings under 182 and/or 132A or it refers only fo the execulior info force: completion, fuifiliment: perfecting <Q}. SA RZ RSP II SUE UCC PRES 1 any of the warrant even though as a result of Such, ~ execution the proceedings under section JG2 er 132A are yet to be completed. The taiter. situaati rt wo ull inelide a cause U1 Lun a t order une er Section PS2(S) is passed, in such & sase i carn be said that though the werrant of auhroise wor ie /vas '7 7S urider Section! 'i 32) 243) toord. execute", also means "lo complete f for conclusion of the proceedings . under qouta@don of & perion COUPLE . A contrary view is as much possible f one consider the spirit of the scherne wihtich ; expeditions disposal of the searc reasonahie ia interpret fal 'reqrih 1S riot . execulion completion 32A. The period during which the proceecinec excluded for the purpose of courdin one or livo years under section 1SSBE. Otherwis fo absurd is Ufted and if meu. ihuisy < spented ef one or tivo years by all those. years duriig: 1 proceedings under Sector 2) S26S) Send be "cgreed lef-this view that percdir gees: cure. nap the: rgb ' me oe uninout doing Manation added to 'at perl oy bee woo i woe oe second search on tie basis of the same authorisation issued AUiLTLoOrE ation is to be issued in respect of one premises OMe Ss search is conmeluced, w "hn the searching part authorisation is issued om dH ceri into consideration for the purpose DlOSk BSSCSSMICne. CONCLUSIONS: oye orn lene wy dd has to joGk iva aH is sime Guo = PSE ; ESS e a... "i matter back fo the Tribunal for fresh consideration keeon mind the observations made in this judgment consider the nsider while Therel action of the be the subject Has Tol validity of ci Saar acces Pgs, peel or - se a. a th Sea fom, ar : on md : SS me ra ac Soot Ay "ial AY my. oe an! weenie . : baa Wiehe Niu i pi cane wy ORDER
£ H we ion)
a) oe a a ;
iy a i. = 3 a a3 ro x o "ea Brod Soni a Nee? Poe Fees 3 aS o o Ss ™ aa "posi San seat ped hn, eu 'on Se se anna et ae panes ia sy i. _ va ag ay ns ay 2 we : * . _ on "8 pad iw ~ a Jae a ~ a a ia en "tes bs 'Petal gt ad a mS nk = a n veal fo ER: on a x My na on of Se ® a va a road more a a vag an sal Sand "
aa i 2 'id "
wed mo aS a - an tr "td cae Se ra my «ti tome o a ci ae @) oy 4