Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 80 (0.43 seconds)Section 132 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 158BE in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 148 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
The Income Tax Act, 1961
Dr. C. Balakrishnan Nair And Anr. vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax And Anr. on 6 January, 1999
5.4 It was further submitted that, there may be situations where notice u/s 158 BC might have been issued without there being a search at all. The Hon'ble ITAT would be entitled to look into this aspect as there would be no Panchanama at all. If the search proceedings are quashed, the assessment made is automatically quashed as held in Dr. C. Balakrishnan Nair & Another Vs. CIT & Another (237 ITR 70) Kerla, where the Hon'ble High Court quashed the proceedings, under chapter XIVB. The Tribunal being the higher fact finding authority can give a finding as to whether there was a search or not. But it cannot pronounce upon the legality of the search, which is the domain of High Court. The appellate authority can do only what the original authorities can do. For this proposition he relied upon following cases.
Section 158BC in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
B.K. Nowlakha And Others vs Union Of India And Others on 19 August, 1991
Reacting to arguments submitted by Sri Vankatesan that the decision of third member in Dr. A.K. Bhansal (Supra) inter alia ruled that Tribunal has power to go into the search activity U/s 132 needs and deserves a meritorious consideration, it was submitted that the operation of the entire order in Dr. A.K. Bhansalis case has been stayed by the Hon'ble High Court of Allahabad. Hence, this decision should not be given the meritorious consideration. It was therefore submitted that the answer to the first question should be in the negative.