Skip to main content

Tax Raids Under IT Act, 1956

The numbers of search warrants executed under the Income Tax Act, 1961 during the years 2010-11, 2011-12 and the current year are as under:


Period
Number of warrants executed
2010-11
4852
2011-12
5260
2012-13*
1540
(upto Sept. 2012)

                                  *figures are provisional

Income Tax Department conducts search and seizure actions based on credible information relating to ‘persons’, which include individuals, Hindu undivided families (HUFs), firms, companies, association of persons (AoPs), body of individuals (BoIs), local authorities and any artificial juridical person, who satisfy any of the conditions specified in Section 132 (1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. As these persons are engaged in diversified businesses/professions across different sectors spread all over the country, Person-wise/sector-wise details of such operations are not separately maintained. However, data regarding number of search warrants executed is maintained as per the particulars given in answer to above.

As per the provisions of the Income Tax Act 1961, immovable properties cannot be seized during search and seizure actions. The details of assets seized by the Income Tax Department during search and seizure actions during the above mentioned financial years are as under:

Financial Year           Cash (in          Jewellery (in   Other Assets (in         Total Assets (in
                                    Rs. crore)       Rs. crore)       Rs. crore)                   Rs. crore)

2010-11                       440.28             184.15             150.55                         774.98
2011-12                       499.9               271.39             134.3                           905.60
2012-13*                     173.39             71.29               39.61                           290.29
(upto Sept. 2012)
 *figures are provisional

Search proceedings are followed by quasi judicial proceedings, which involve detailed examination of the seized documents. The evidence gathered during the search proceedings are used in assessment and re-assessment of incomes of the persons in whose cases, search actions are undertaken. The amount of tax evaded is quantified after completion of assessment/re-assessment. Any existing liability and the demand arising out of tax/interest/penalty on account of undisclosed income detected during search action, is recovered from the assets seized during search operations. Any assets or its proceeds, which remain after these liabilities have been discharged, are released. Assets may be released with the prior approval of the Commissioners of Income Tax if conditions specified in Section 132 B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are met. Such details are available with Assessing Officers, spread all over the country and thus, not maintained centrally.

 The cash seized during searches is deposited in the Government exchequer. However, other assets are dealt with, for application towards the liability as per provisions of Section 132 B of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Comments

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

Court approached in the early stages of arbitration will prevail in all other subsequent proceedings

In National Highway Authority of India v. Hindustan Steelworks Construction Limited, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court opined that once the parties have approached a certain court for relief under Act at earlier stages of disputes then it is same court that, parties must return to for all other subsequent proceedings. Language of Section 42 of Act is categorical and brooks no exception. In fact, the language used has the effect of jurisdiction of all courts since it states that once an application has been made in Part I of the Act then ―that Court alone shall have jurisdiction over arbitral proceedings and all subsequent applications arising out of that agreement and arbitral proceedings shall be made in that Court and in no other Court. Court holds that NHAI in present case cannot take advantage of Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for explaining inordinate delay in filing present petition under Section 34 of this Act in this Court.
Post a Comment
Read more

No Rebate For Stamp Duty Paid In Another State - Bombay HC

A three judge bench of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court (Bombay HC) in a recent judgment in the matter of Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, Maharashtra State, Pune and Superintendent of Stamp (Headquarters), Mumbai v Reliance Industries Limited, Mumbai and Reliance Petroleum Limited, Gujarat1 has held that orders in case of a scheme of arrangement under Section 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 (Act) involving different High Courts in multiple states, are separate instruments in themselves. Accordingly, stamp duty would be payable on all the orders (and consequently, all the states) without the benefit of remission, rebate or set-off.
Post a Comment
Read more

The recovery of vehicles by the financier not an offence - SC

Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 8907  of 2009 Anup Sarmah (Petitioner) Vs Bhola Nath Sharma & Ors.(Respondents) The petitioner submitted that  respondents-financer had forcibly taken away the vehicle financed by them and  illegally deprived the petitioner from its lawful possession  and  thus,  committed  a crime. The complaint filed by the petitioner had been  entertained  by  the Judicial Magistrate (Ist Class), Gauhati (Assam) in Complaint Case  No.  608 of 2009, even directing the interim custody of the vehicle (Maruti  Zen)  be given to the petitioner vide order dated  17.3.2009.  The respondent on approaching the Guwahati High  Court against this order, the hon'ble court squashed the criminal  proceedings  pending   before  the  learned Magistrate. After hearing both sides, the Hon'ble Supreme Court decided on 30th...
7 comments
Read more