Anil Minda and Others Vs CIT (Supreme Court of India)
Supreme Court upholds Delhi High Court ruling on interpretation of Explanation 2 to Section 158BE with respect to limitation period for completion of assessment under Section 158BC; Delhi High Court had set aside ITAT order by holding that the limitation period shall be reckoned from the date of last Panchnama though related to first search authorisation out of the two search authorisations; Assessee-Individual was subjected to search operation by authorisation dated 13.03.2001 for which the Panchnama was drawn on 11.04.2001 whereas prior to this on Mar 26, 2001 another search authorisation was issued for which Panchnama was drawn on the same day while the assessment was completed in April 2003; ITAT held that limitation period of two years from the end of the month shall be reckoned as per 26.03.2001, thus, held the assessment as time-barred whereas Delhi High Court held that the same shall be reckoned as per the date of last Panchnama i.e., 11.04.2001; Supreme Court relies on coordinate bench ruling in VLS Finance Ltd. & Another v. CIT & Another, (2016) 12 SCC 32 (SC) wherein it was held that the relevant date for calculating limitation period would be the date on which the Panchnama is drawn and not the date on which the authorisation is issued; Supreme Court also observes that the date of Panchnama is relevant because the block assessment proceedings are initiated on the entire material seized during search operation recorded in the Panchnama; Supreme Court approves Delhi High Court’s view that the date of the Panchnama last drawn would be the relevant date for considering the period of limitation of two years and not the last date of authorisation; Rejects Assessee’s submission that the date of the last authorisation is to be considered for the purpose of reckoning limitation of two years by holding that it would frustrate the entire object and purpose of Explanation 2 to Section 158BE; Supreme Court, thus, dismisses Assessee’s appeals. – [Anil Minda and Others v. CIT – Date of Judgment : 24.03.2023 (SC)]
FULL TEXT OF THE SUPREME COURT JUDGMENT/ORDER
1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned common judgment and order dated 14.09.2010 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in ITA No. 582 of 2009 and other allied appeals, by which the Division Bench of the High Court has allowed the said appeals preferred by the Revenue and set aside the orders passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (for short, ‘ITAT’) holding that the assessment orders passed in the case of the respective assessees were time barred as the assessments were not completed within two years from the end of the month in which the last authorisation for search under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’) was issued, the respective assessees have preferred the present appeals.
2. For the sake of convenience, the facts arising out of the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court in ITA No. 582/2009 are narrated, which in nutshell are as under:
2.1 That 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:
