Case Law Details
CIT v. Smt. Shaila Agarwal (Allahabad High Court) – he second proviso to Section 153A of the Act, refers to abatement of the pending assessment or re-assessment proceedings. The word ‘pending’ does not operate any such interpretation, that wherever the appeal against such assessment or reassessment is pending, the same along with assessment or reassessment proceedings is liable to be abated. The principles of interpretation of taxing statutes do not permit the Court to interpret the Second Proviso to Section 153A in a manner that where the assessment or reassessment proceedings are complete, and the matter is pending in appeal in the Tribunal, the entire proceedings will abate.
There is another aspect to the matter, namely that the abatement of any proceedings has serious causes and effect in as much as the abatement of the proceedings, takes away all the consequences that arise thereafter. In the present case after deducting bogus gifts in the regular assessment proceedings, the proceedings for penalty were drawn under Section 271 (1) (c) of the Act. The material found in the search may be a ground for notice and assessment under Section 153A of the Act but that would not efface or terminate all the consequence, which has arisen out of the regular assessment or reassessment resulting into the demand or proceedings of penalty.
Judgement reserved on 10.10.2011
Judgement delivered on 25.11.2011
Allahabad High Court
Income Tax Appeal No. 241 of 2008
Commissioner of Income-tax (Central), Kanpur
Vs.
Smt. Shaila Agarwal
Hon. Sunil Ambwani, J. Hon. K.N. Pandey, J.
3. The appeal was admitted on the questions of law as follows:-
“Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Honourable Income tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in setting aside the case and restore to the file of A. O. without appreciating that as per provisions of section 153 A, “only assessment pending” as on the date of search are abated and not the “assessment completed” or ‘appeal pending’?”
8. The Tribunal, hearing the appeal against the order of CIT (A) dated 22.5.2006 allowed the appeals accepting the arguments made on behalf of appellant-assessee that once a notice under Section 1 53A has been issued after search and seizure operations, as per the provisions of Section 153A, all the assessments of the six preceding assessment years prior to the date of search have to abate and that even the completed and concluded assessments should stand merged in the fresh assessment to be made by the Assessing Officer under Section 153A in pursuance of the search. The Tribunal observed in para 7 to 9 of its order:-
“The present appeal arises out of the assessment made prior to the date of the search. The intention of the legislature is to make a combined assessment of all the income disclosed or assessed in regular assessment and discovered in search. We accordingly restore the assessment to the file of the Assessing Officer to consider these additions in the assessment u/s 153A as well. However, in an event where search is declared illegal by any court or assessment u/s 153A is held invalid, then this appeal in relation to regular assessment will revive at the instance of the department if an application is moved to the Tribunal in this behalf. Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is allowed but for statistical purposes and subject to the observations made above. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order is pronounced in the open court on 31.10.2007.”
9. Shri Bharat Ji Agrawal appearing for the department submits that the assessment was completed, the assessment order was passed on 31.3.2005. The appeal was also decided by CIT (A) on 22.5.2006 much before the initiation of search under Section 132 on 17.10.2006. The proceedings for assessment or reassessment were not pending on 17.10.2006 and thus according to the second proviso of Section 153A, only the pending assessment or reassessment is to abate. The assessments, which had become final are not liable to abate. The second appeal filed before the ITAT is not continuation of the proceedings of assessment. He submits that in pursuance to the assessment order under Section 143 (3) a penalty of Rs.97,85,925/- was imposed under Section 271 (1) (c) of the Act. If the interpretation given by the ITAT is to be accepted, the entire proceedings of penalty will also abate giving an unreasonable advantage to the assessee, insptie of adverse findings inviting penalty.
“Provided further that assessment or reassessment, if any, relating to any assessment year falling within the period of six assessment years referred to in this section pending on the date of initiation of the search under section 132 or making of requisition under section 132A, as the case may be, shall abate.”
12. A plain reading of Section 153A would show that where notice under this Section is issued as result of any search under Section 132, assessment or reassessment if any relating to any assessment year falling within the period of six assessment years referred to under Section 153, pending on the date of initiation of search under Section 132 or requisition under Section 132A shall abate. The words, pending on the date of initiation of search under Section 132, or making of requisition under Section 132A, as the case may be, has to be assigned simple and plain meaning. Where the assessment or re-assessment is finalised, there are no pending proceedings to be abated, and restored to the file of the assessing officer. To abate means to diminish or to take away. The word ‘abatement’ has been defined in the Concise Law Dictionary (P. Ramanatha Aiyer) as follows:-
“Abatement. “Abatement” means, in respect of any chargeable accounting period, ending on or before the 31st day of March, 1947 a sum which bears to a sum equal to‑
(a) in the case of a company, not being a company deemed for the purposes of Section 9 to be a firm, six per cent of the capital of the company on the first day of the said period computed in accordance with Schedule II, or one lakh of rupees, whichever is greater, or
(b) in the case of a firm having‑
(i) nor more than two working partners, one lakh of rupees, or
(ii) three working partners, one and a half of rupees, or
(iii) four or more working partners, two lakh of rupees, or
(c) in the case of a Hindu undivided family, two lakhs of rupees, or
(d) in any other case, one lakh of rupees,-
The same proportion as the said period bears to the period of one year and, in respect of any chargeable accounting period beginning after the 31st day of March, 1947, such sum as may be fixed by the annual Finance Act. [Business Profits Tax Act (21 of 1947), S.2 (1)]
Removal or destruction, (as) of a nuisance; failure; premature end, suspension or diminution, (as) of an action or of a legacy.
The action of abating; being abated. {O.XXII, R.1, CPC (5 of 1908)]; decrease [S.12 (3) (b) (i), Specific Relief Act (47 of 1963)].
Of An Action Or Suit: In civil law an abatement of a suit is a complete termination of it. Abatement of a matter or cause is caused by the same becoming defective on account of the death of the parties materially interested. (Ency. of the Laws of England)
A suspension or termination of proceedings for want of proper parties or due to some technical defect.
The abatement of the main action abates proceedings ancillary or collateral to it.
In Criminal Law: Abatement of proceedings connotes their termination without any decision on merits and without the assent of the prosecutor. (Ency. of the Laws of England)
In Revenue Law: Abatement is a deduction from or refunding of duties on goods damaged during importation or in store.”
13. The word ‘abatement’ is referable to something, which is pending alive, or is subject to deduction. The abatement refers to suspension or termination of the proceedings either of the main action, or the proceedings ancillary or collateral to it. The word is commonly used in the legislation’s, which provide for abatement of action/ suit; abatement of legacies; abatement of nuisance; and all actions for such nature, which have the pendency or continuance. The proceedings, which have already terminated are not liable for abatement unless statute expressly provides for such consequence thereof.
“The Assessing Officer shall assess or reassess the total income of each of these six assessment years. Assessment or reassessment, if any, relating to any assessment year falling within the period of six assessment years pending on the date of initiation of the search under section 132 or requisition under section 132A, as the case may be, shall abate. It is clarified that the appeal, revision or rectification proceedings pending on the date of initiation of search under section 132 or requisition shall not abate. Save as otherwise provided in the proposed section 153A, section 153B and section 153C, all other provisions of this Act shall apply to the assessment or reassessment made under section 153A. It i also clarified that assessment or reassessment made under section 1 53A shall be subject to interest, penalty and prosecution, if applicable. In the assessment or reassessment made in respect of an assessment year under this section, the tax shall be chargeable at the rate or rates as applicable to such assessment year.”
18. In State of Rajasthan & Ors. v. Khandaka Jain Jewellers, (2007) 14 SCC 339 the Supreme Court reiterating the principles of interpretation of taxing statutes held in para 24 as follows:-“A taxing statute has to be construed as it is all these contingencies that the matter was under litigation and the value of the property by that time shot up cannot be taken into account for interpreting the provisions of a taxing statute. As already mentioned above a taxing statute has to be construed strictly and if it is construed strictly then the plea that the incumbent took a long time to get a decree for execution against the vendor that consideration cannot weigh with the Court for interpreting the provisions of the taxing statutes.”
19. The second proviso to Section 1 53A of the Act, refers to abatement of the pending assessment or re-assessment proceedings. The word ‘pending’ does not operate any such interpretation, that wherever the appeal against such assessment or reassessment is pending, the same along with assessment or reassessment proceedings is liable to be abated. The principles of interpretation of taxing statutes do not permit the Court to interpret the Second Proviso to Section 153A in a manner that where the assessment or reassessment proceedings are complete, and the matter is pending in appeal in the Tribunal, the entire proceedings will abate.
20. There is another aspect to the matter, namely that the abatement of any proceedings has serious causes and effect in as much as the abatement of the proceedings, takes away all the consequences that arise thereafter. In the present case after deducting bogus gifts in the regular assessment proceedings, the proceedings for penalty were drawn under Section 271 (1) (c) of the Act. The material found in the search may be a ground for notice and assessment under Section 153A of the Act but that would not efface or terminate all the consequence, which has arisen out of the regular assessment or reassessment resulting into the demand or proceedings of penalty.
21. For the aforesaid reasons, we are of the opinion that the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal erred in law in abating the regular assessment proceedings, which had become final, and restoring them as a consequence of search under Section 132, and notice under Section 153A of the Act to the file of the Assessing Officer.
22. The appeal is allowed. The order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 31st October, 2007 is set aside. The question of law is decided in favour of the revenue and against the assessee. The Tribunal will decide the appeal on merits in accordance with law.