Case Law Details
PDIT Vs Laljibhai Kanjibhai Mandalia (Supreme Court of India)
Held that, in terms of the explanation inserted by the Finance Act, 2017 with retrospective effect from 1.4.1962, search conducted on the reason to believe is not required to be disclosed to any person or any authority or the appellate tribunal.
Facts-
The assessee provide loan to M/s. Goan Recreation Clubs Private Ltd. on the security of the property of another company. The loan was repaid in five installments. The appellant/revenue believed that the investment and nature of the transaction entered into by the assessee was akin to the familiar modus operandi employed by the entry operators to provide accommodation entry.
The appellant/ revenue conducted a search u/s. 132 in the residential premises of the assessee. The satisfaction note was not supplied to the assessee nor was required to be disclosed in terms of explanation to section 132(1). The aggrieved assessee filed a Writ petition before the jurisdictional High Court alleging that the conditions precedent as specified in Section 132 of the Act are not satisfied. Thus, the High Court quashed the warrant of authorization issued by the appellant under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act,1961. Being aggrieved, the revenue filed an appeal before the Supreme Court.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
