COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. SURAJ PRAKASH SONI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the parties. The learned Tribunal has held relying upon series of judgments of different Benches of the Tribunal, and the judgments of the Madras High Court, Calcutta High Court, and Kerala High Court that the proceedings shall be deemed to have been initiated under Section 132 when authorisation for search was made, and shall not be deemed to have been initiated when actual search is undertaken. Then examining the case from that, stand point, it has been found that the proceedings were initiated against the assessee prior to 1st Jan., 1997 i.e. the date when the provisions of Section 158 BFA(2) were introduced, and therefore, they could not be applied to the assessee.

(2.) IN our view, the findings do not require any interference. More so, when the learned Counsel for the Revenue could not show any other contrary judgment whether of any other High Court, or even of the Tribunal, or Hon'ble the Supreme Court.