Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central, Jaipur v. M/S. Shree Ram Lime Products Limited

D.B. INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.108/2012 Commissioner of Income Tax, Central, JaipurVs.M/s. Shree Ram Lime Products Limited DATE OF ORDER : 17.11.2015 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOVIND MATHURHON'BLE MISS JUSTICE JAISHREE THAKUR Mr. K.K. Bissa, for the appellant ... Heard learned counsel for the appellant. Learned counsel has made available for our perusal the recordwhich includes the Panchnama dated 20.12.2002, 21.12.2002, theprohibitory order dated 21.12.2002 and order dated 3.1.2003.So also the Panchnama dated 3.1.2003. We also find on record atpage 36 revocation order dated 21.12.2002 revoking theprohibitory order under Section 132(3) at 3.15pm. Likewise theprohibitory order is available at page 35 which is dated 21.12.2002.After revoking the prohibitory order dated 21.12.2002, there isnothing to show that any fresh prohibitory order was clamped. Thenthe Panchnama dated 20.21.2002, 21.12.2002, does not show thatthere completed on any subsequent date in close proximity or incontinuity. Thus, it is clear that the entire episode was over on21.12.2002, and therefore, the prohibitory order was revoked. Inthat view of the matter, we do not find any error in the findingsrecorded by learned Tribunal. It was contended that thePanchnama dated 3.1.2003 was required to be prepared at thattime, and there is nothing to show, much less to assume, that at Sanjay that time it was prepared with intention to extend the time limit.Suffice it to say that nothing was done on 3.1.2003 except merelypreparing the Panchnama commencing the search at 5.05pm andconcluding at 5.15pm. In this view of the matter the appeal is dismissed. The record is returned to learned counsel. , J. , J.