Davinder Mehra v. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Amritsar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. ITA No. 291 of 2007Date of decision 7 .4.2010 Davinder Mehra... Appellant Versus Commissioner of Income Tax, Amritsar ... RespondentITA No. 372 of 2009 Baldev Raj Mehra ...Appellant Versus Commissioner of Income Tax, Amritsar... Respondents CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMARHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present:Mr.Salil Kapoor ,Advocate for the appellant Ms. N.P.K.Singh, Advocate for the respondent revenue 1.To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 2.Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest ? M.M.KUMAR, J. This order shall dispose of two appeals bearing ITA No.291 of2007 and 372 of 2009 as the issue raised in both the appeals is common. Forthe purposes of this order, facts are being taken from ITA No.291 of 2007. The instant appeal filed by the assessee under Section 260A ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961(for brevity 'the Act') is directed against orderdated 31.1.2007 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AmritsarBench, Amritsar in ITA No.29 (ASR)/2004 in respect of block assessmentperiod 1.4.1979 to 22.7.1979. When the appeal was admitted, the followingsubstantive questions of law were framed for determination of this Court: “ I) Whether the facts and circumstances of the case, the ITATwas correct in law in holding that while deciding the appeal against the assessment order passed under Section 158 BC, theTribunal was not competent to go into the satisfaction recordedunder Section 132 of the Income Tax Act prior to initiation ofsearch ? II)Whether in facts and circumstances of the case, the ITATwas correct in law in holding that the proviso to Section 143(2)did not apply to the Block Assessment framed under Section158 BC of the Income Tax Act.” The assessee- appellant has filed an application asserting thatquestion No. II is now covered by a judgement of Hon'ble the SupremeCourt rendered in the case of Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax andanotherv. M/s Hotel Blue Moon(2010) 321 ITR 362 (SC). It has beenclaimed that the above question of law has been settled in the aforesaidjudgement in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. Hon'ble theSupreme Court has opined that service of notice on all the assessee underSection 143(2) of the Act has to be within the prescribed period of time forframing block assessment under Chapter XIV B of the Act. Notice of the application was issued with a view to find outwhether question No. II is covered by the judgement of Hon'ble theSupreme Court in the case of M/s Hotel Blue Moon(supra). Ms. N.P.K.Singh, counsel for the Revenue has put inappearance. Mr. Salil Kapoor, learned counsel for the assessee hassubmitted that question No. II has been answered by Hon'ble the SupremeCourt in favour of the assessee in the case of M/s Blue Moon (supra) and inview thereof question No. I has been rendered academic. According to the ITA No. 291 of 2007 learned counsel once the period of limitation provided by Section 143(2) ofthe Act is applicable to the block assessment then the instant appeal has tobe allowed and the order of the Tribunal is liable to be quashed. The Istquestion would pale into insignificance and does not require to be answered. Ms. N.P.K.Singh, Counsel for the Revenue has not been ableto successfully controvert the submission made by the counsel for theassessee and has conceded that question No.2 is covered against theRevenue and in favour of the assessee. As a sequel to the above discussion, question No. II isanswered in favour of the assessee- appellant and question No. I is left openas the adjudication on question No. I has been rendered academic. Theappeal and application stands disposed of. A copy of this order be placed on the file of connected appeal (M.M.Kumar) Judge 7.4.2010okg (Jitendra Chauhan)Judge