Allowing the appeal the Tribunal held that subsequent panchnama revoking prohibitory order without seizure of material the time limit is not extended. Restraint order not lifted within one month of assessment order. Release of prohibitory order, panchnama and assessment order is invalid referred Central Board Of Direct Taxes Circular, Dated 3-7-2002. Last panchnama cancellation of restraint order is considered as second Panchnama is not last panchnama of conclusion of search. Order is barred by limitation. Use of electronic documents used as evidence the mandatory conditions of Section 65B of Indian Evidence Act is not complied with hence not admissible as evidence. As regards bogus purchases, cash purchase of tobacco from grey market is concerned estimation of profit at 12.5 Per Cent. is held to be proper. (AY. 2012-13 to 2020-21)
Polisetty Somasundaram v. Dy. CIT (2024) 115 ITR 548 (Visakhapatnam) (Trib)
S. 153B : Assessment-Search-Time limit-Limitation-Last panchanama-Subsequent panchnama revoking prohibitory order without seizure of material-Time limit is not extended-Restraint order not lifted within one month of assessment order-Central Board Of Direct Taxes instruction-Release of prohibitory order,panchnama and assessment order is invalid-Central Board Of Direct Taxes Circular, Dated 3-7-2002-Last panchnama cancellation of restraint order-Second Panchnama is not last panchnama of conclusion of search-Electronic documents used as evidence-Mandatory conditions of Section 65B of Indian Evidence Act is not complied with-Not admissible evidence-Bogus purchases-Cash purchase of tobacco from grey market-Estimation of profit at 12.5 Per Cent. is proper. [S. 132(3), 132(8A), 143(3) 153A, Indian Evidence Act, 1872, S.65B (2)(d), 65B(4)]