COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. SH. ANIL MINDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In all these appeals, an interesting question of law arises relating to the interpretation that needs to be given to the provisions of Section 132(1) of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') touching upon the limitation aspect contained therein. Following common question of law, in this behalf, is raised by the Revenue in all these appeals:

(2.) The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') has held that the assessment orders passed in the case of all these assessees were time barred, as the assessments were not completed within two years from the end of month in which the last authorization for search under Section 132 of the Act was issued. To appreciate this controversy, we have taken note of the dates as they appear in ITA No. 582 of 2009. The assessee is the son of J.P. Minda, who is in the Minda Group of business, engaged in manufacturing of various automobiles components. The two warrants of authorization under Section 132(1) of the Act for carrying out the search at bank locker with Canara Bank, Kamla Nagar, were issued on 13.03.2001 and 26.03.2001. Warrants which were executed on 13.03.2001 were executed on various dates, which are as under:

(3.) During the execution of the search warrants dated 13.03.2001, the Income Tax authorities got the information about a locker belonging to the assessee in a bank. Further, on 26.03.2001, second authorization was issued for searching this locker and this was executed on 26.03.2001 itself. It is, thus, clear from the aforesaid that in respect of first authorization given on 13.03.2001, which was for search at the office and residence of the assessee, it continued for some time and culminated only on 11.04.2001. However, as far as second search authorization is concerned, which was given on 26.03.2001, that was executed on the same day and Panchnama drawn on 26.03.2001.