Gist of the order
Section 153A of the Act was introduced by the
Finance Act, 2003 w. e. f. 01.06.2003 and it provides for assessment in
the case of search or requisition. It is mandatory for the assessing
officer, whenever there is a search under section 132, to issue notice
to the person searched requiring him to furnish the returns of income
for the six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year
relevant to the previous year in which the search was conducted. Once
the returns are filed, the assessing officer shall assess or reassess
the total income in respect of the each assessment year falling within
the six assessment years. There is an Explanation to the section which
provides that all other provisions of the Income Tax Act shall apply to
the assessment made under this section, which means that the provisions
of section 142, 143, etc. are applicable and these provisions ensure
that reasonable opportunity is afforded to the petitioner to put forth
his case. We are, therefore, unable to accept the contention of the
petitioner that he would be put to harassment because of the notices
issued under section 153A. The section is couched in mandatory language
which implies that once there is a search, the assessing officer has no
option but to call upon the assessee to file the returns of the income
for the earlier six assessment years. It is not merely the undisclosed
income that will be brought to tax in such assessments, but the total
income of the assessee, including both the income earlier disclosed and
income found consequent to the search, would be brought to tax. The
normal provisions relating to inquiry, affording opportunity, etc.,
which are provided for in sections 142, 143, etc. are to be followed by
the assessing officer. There is also a time limit for completion of the
assessment under section 153A which is prescribed in section 153B. In
these circumstances the petitioner‟s contention that he would be put
through unnecessary harassment is a non-starter. He has to face the
assessment proceedings and participate in them; in case he has evidence
or material to show that he has not earned any income which is not
disclosed to the income tax authorities or to rebut the material
gathered during the search, it is perfectly open to him to do so. In
fact, it is his right which is well protected by various provisions of
the Income Tax Act. Appeal remedies are also available against the
assessment framed. The apprehension of the petitioner is unfounded. This
court is also of the opinion that frequent recourse to remedies under
Article 226, similar to this one, are more often than speculative, and
intended to delay and stall adjudication proceedings, which would have
to take place. The scope of interference in these proceedings is limited
to seeing whether there was a satisfaction recorded by the concerned
officials. That part had been achieved by the previous writ proceedings;
the only liberty reserved was to seek remedies in case the petitioner
was issued notice under Section 153A. In the present case however the
entire gamut of issues relating to the recording of satisfaction, and
facts pertaining thereto were canvassed, to suggest that the notice was
issued mindlessly. While the Court is conscious of a certain degree of
hardship which would occur to any assessee whose premises are searched,
that does not afford it any higher right or confer greater remedies, or
expand the scope of a limited jurisdiction under Article 226. The
present petition is therefore speculative, and misconceived.