COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX Vs. S N GURUDATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Revenue has preferred this appeal against the order passed by the Tribunal which has held that the block assessment order passed on 30.05.1997 is barred by limitation as the same is beyond the period of limitation prescribed under the Act.

(2.) THE premises of the assessee was searched on 29.3.1996 and a panchanama was drawn on that day in continuation of the search, warrant was issued against the premises of the assessee and was searched on 23.5.1996. The assessing authority passed the order of block assessment dated 30.05.1997. This Court in the case of C. RAMAIAH REDDY Vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (IMV),2011 339 ITR 210 (Karn) has held as follows: -

(3.) ADMITTEDLY for conducting the search either on 25.4.1996 or on 23.5.1996 there was no search warrant. Period of limitation is one year from the last day of the month in which the panchanama was drawn. If that is taken into consideration, the order ought to have been passed on 31.3.1997, whereas the order is passed on 30.5.1997. Therefore, the order passed by the Tribunal cannot be found fault with. In fact the said view has been taken by several High Courts and the special leave petition filed against such orders are dismissed at the stage of admission by Hon'ble Supreme Court. In that view of the matter, we do not see any merit in the matter and the substantial question is answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. As it is submitted that the Revenue has preferred this appeal challenging the order passed in C. RAMAIAH REDDY's case on this aspect. Therefore, they seek liberty to be reserved in the event of the Apex Court holding in their favour.