SAKTHIVEL BANKERS Vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WE have heard learned counsel for the assessee at considerable length. But we are not persuaded to hold that the order made by the Tribunal, directing remand of the matter to the Assessing Officer calls for any interference.

(2.) ADMITTEDLY, the search was conducted in the premises of one Lakshmanan and certain documents were recovered during that search, which included documents pertaining to eight firms in which Lakshmanan and his wife were partners and also certain documents concerning his wife. Lakshmanan gave a statement, offering a sum of Rs. 125 lakhs as undisclosed income and pleaded inability to furnish the names of persons in whose favour credits have been entered in the books of account of those firms and of his wife. Notices were issued simultaneously to Lakshmanan, to his wife and to the eight firms. Lakshmanan had no doubt whatsoever as to the purpose for which the notice was issued and he being the person, who apparently was in control of the affairs of the firm of which he was a partner, the firms as also his wife were not in doubt as to the purpose for which the notice was issued or the source of the authority of the officer issuing the notice. In fact, in response to the notices returns were filed by all of them. Absence of mention of the provision in the notice was, therefore, not a circumstance which could be said to vitiate the ultimate order.

(3.) THERE is no merit in this appeal and the same is accordingly dismissed. No costs.