THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI v. M/S A.R. ENTERPRISES (Civil Appeal No. 2688 of 2006) JANUARY 14, 2013 [D.K. JAIN, H.L. DATTU AND JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR, JJ.] INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
c Chapter XIV-B – Scope of – Explained – ss. 158 BB, 158 BC and 158 BO read with ss. 132 and 139 -Detection of undisclosed income of assessee during search of another concern – Plea of assessee that since it had paid Advance 0 Tax, its income could not be said to be undisclosed – Held: Payment of Advance Tax, which is based upon estimated
income, cannot tantamount to the disclosure of the total income, which must be declared in the return – Disclosure of total income by filing of return u/s 139 is mandatory even after E payment of Advance Tax by an assessee – In view of the fact that the assessee had not filed its return of income by the due date, Assessing Officer was correct in assuming that the
assessee would not have disclosed its total income. s. 158 – "Undisclosed income" – Held: Undisclosed income is defined by s. 158B as that income "which has not been or would not have been disclosed for the purposes of
this Act" – The only way of disclosing income, on the part of an assessee, is through filing of a return, as stipulated in the Act and, therefore, an "undisclosed income" signifies income not stated in the return filed – Income to be deemed as
undisclosed – Explained s. 158 – "Undisclosed income" and tax deducted at A source – Held: Since the tax to be deducted at source is also computed on estimated income of an assessee for relevant
financial year, mere deduction of tax at source, also, does not amount to disclosure of income, nor does it indicate the intention to disclose income most definitely when the same B is not disclosed in the returns filed for assessment year concerned.
The respondent-assessee, a firm which came into existence in June 1992, on discovery of some documents C in a search operation carried out in premises of another concern on 23.2.1996, was found to have not filed return
of its taxable income for the assessment year 1995-96. The assessing officer initiated action u/s 158 BO of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and rejected the plea of the assessee that since in relation to assessment year 1995-
D 96 it had already paid Advance Tax in three instalments, income for that period could not be deemed to be undisclosed. The assessing officer proceeded to compute total undisclosed income for the block period
1993-94 to 1995-96 (upto the date of search) treating the E income returned by the assessee for the period 1995-96 as nil in terms of s.158 BB(1)(c) of the Act. The Tribunal and the High Court held that the payment of Advance Tax
itself implied disclosure of income on which Advance Tax was paid. In the instant appeals filed by Revenue, the question for consideration before the Court was: whether payment of Advance Tax by an assessee would by itself
tantamount to disclosure of income for the relevant G assessment year; and whether such income could be treated as undisclosed income for the purpose of application of Chapter XIVB of the Act?
Allowing the appeals, the Court HELD: Scope of Chapter VIV-B and its provisions: ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI v. A.R. ENTERPRISES 1.1. Chapter XIV-8 of the Income Tax Act, 1961
consisting of ss.1588 to 1588H was inserted by the Finance Act, 1995 with effect from 1.07.1995. The heading of Chapter XIV-8 reads "Special Procedure for Assessment of Search Cases". It was introduced for the
assessment of undisclosed income determined as a result of search carried out u/s 132 of the Act or requisitioning of documents or assets u/s 132A of the Act. The chapter is a self-contained code and gets
attracted as a result of search proceedings initiated by the .income tax authorities u/s 132 of the Act, c notwithstanding any other provisions of the Act except to the extent provided for in the Chapter. In the instant
case, resort to this Chapter was required to be made since on conduct of search at the premises of the other concern, documents of the respondent-assessee were recovered, that indicated non-disclosure of income by the
latter. In such a scenario, s.15880 gets attracted. [para 11-12] [309-8-G] 1.2. A bare reading of s.15880 makes it clear that the condition precedent for invoking a block assessment is
a search conducted u/s 132, or documents or assets requisitioned u/s 132-A. Moreover, s.15880 permits the application of the provisions of this Chapter only on the satisfaction of the assessing officer that the seized
documents show undisclosed income of a person other than the person with respect to whom search was conducted or a requisition was made. It is trite law that such satisfaction must be recorded for the benefit of the
assessee. [para 13] [310-8-0] Manish Maheshwari Vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr. 2007 (3) SCR 61 = 2007 (3) SCC 794 – referred to. 1.3. A valid search u/s 132 of the Act is a sine qua non
for invoking block assessment proceedings under H Chapter XIV-8. Further according to s.15880 of the Act, the assessing officer must record his or her satisfaction that any undisclosed income belongs to any person,
other than the person with respect to whom search was made u/s132 of the Act. [para 14] [311-8-C] Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Hotel Blue Moon 2010 (2) SCR 282 = 2010 (3) SCC 259 – relied on
1.4. The contention that before initiating proceedings uls 15880 of the Act, the assessing officer had not C recorded his satisfaction that any undisclosed income belonged to the assessee or that the assessee did not
have the intention to disclose their income, was never urged before the High Court and the Tribunal. [para 15] [311-0-F] 2.1. Sections 15880 and 1588C, along with the rest of Chapter XIV-8, find application only in the event of
discovery of "undisclosed income" of an assessee. Undisclosed income is defined by s. 1588 as that income "which has not been or would not have been disclosed E for the purposes of this Act". The legislature has chosen to define "undisclosed income" in terms of income not
disclosed, without providing any definition of "disclosure" of income in the first place. [para 18] [313- G-H; 314-A] 2.2. The only way of disclosing income, on the part of an assessee, is through filing of a return, as stipulated in the Act and, therefore, an "undisclosed income"
signifies income not stated in the return filed. Keeping G that in mind, it seems that the legislature has clearly carved out two scenarios for income to be deemed as undisclosed: (i) where the income has clearly not been
disclosed and (ii) where the income would not have been disclosed. If a situation is covered by any one of the two, H income would be undisclosed in the eyes of the Act and, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,
CHENNAI v. A.R. ENTERPRISES therefore, subject to the machinery provisions of Chapter A XIVB. [para 18] [314-A-C] 2.3. The second category, viz. where income would not have been disclosed, contemplates the likelihood of
disclosure; it is a presumption of the intention of the assessee since in concluding that an assessee would or would not have disclosed income, one is ipso facto making a statement with respect to whether or not the
assessee possessed the intention to do the same. To gauge this, however, reliance must be placed on the surrounding facts and circumstances of the case. [para C 18) [314-C-D] 2.4. Payment of Advance Tax may be a relevant factor
in construing intention to disclose income or filing return as long as the assessee continues to have the D opportunity to file return and disclose his income and has not past the due date of filing return. Therefore, there can be no generic rule as to the significance of payment of
Advance Tax in construing intention of disclosure of income. The same depends on the facts of the case, and hinges on the positioning of the search operations qua the due date for filing returns. If the search is conducted after the expiry of the due date for filing return, payment of Advance Tax is irrelevant in construing the intention
of the assessee to disclose income. Such a situation would find place within the first category carved out by s.1588 of the Act i.e. where income has clearly not been disclosed. The possibility of the intention to disclose does not arise since the opportunity of disclosure has lapsed
i.e. through filing of return of income by the due date. If, G on the other hand, search is conducted prior to the due date for filing return, the opportunity to file return and disclose income still persists. In which case, payment of
Advance Tax may be a material fact for construing whether an assessee intended to disclose. An assessee A is entitled to make the legitimate claim that even though the search or the documents recovered, show an income
earned by him, he has paid Advance Tax for the relevant assessment year and has an opportunity to declare the total income, in the return of income, which he would file B by the due date. Thus, the fulcrum of such a decision is the due date for filing of return of income vis-a-vis date of search. [para 19] [315-A-D; 314-F-H]
2.5. Payment of Advance Tax and filing of return are functions of completely different notions of income i.e. C estimated income and total income respectively. The payment of Advance Tax is based on an estimation of the
total income that is chargeable to tax and not on the total income itself. It is important to bear in mind that total income is distinct from the estimated income, upon the D basis of which, Advance Tax is paid by an assessee.
Advance Tax is based on estimated income and, therefore, it cannot result in the disclosure of the total income assessable and chargeable to tax. [para 20 and 26] [315-E-F; 317-H; 318-A]
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Smt. Premlata Jalani [2003] 264 ITR 744 (Raj); Bill & Peggy Marketing India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 191 (2012) DLT 249; Prime Securities Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner
F of Income Tax [2011] 333 ITR 464 (Born); Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Nilgiri Tea Estate Ltd. [2009] 312 ITR 161 (Ker); Kwality Biscuits Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (2000) 243 ITR 519 (Kar); Commissioner of Income Tax Vs.
Kwality Biscuits Ltd. (2006) 284 ITR 434 (SC); and G Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Upper India Steel Mfg. and Engg. Co. Ltd. (2005) 279 ITR 123 (P&H) – referred to 2.6. In every case where the amount of tax payable
on the total income earned during the financial year is one thousand five hundred rupees or more, then, an H assessee would be liable to pay in the financial year itself, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,
CHENNAI v. A.R. ENTERPRISES Advance Tax on such income, also known as "current A income." According to s. 210(1) of the Act, every person who is liable to pay Advance Tax u/s 208 (whether or not
he has been previously assessed by way of regular assessment) shall, of his own accord, pay Advance Tax on his "current income", calculated in the manner laid down in s. 209. Payment of Advance Tax does not
absolve an assessee from an obligation to file return disclosing total income for the relevant assessment year. The disclosure of total income by the filing of return u/s 139 of the Act is mandatory even after the payment of C
Advance Tax by an assessee. [para 30 and 33) [318-G-H; 319-A, G-H; 320-B-C] Brij Lal & Ors. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Ja/andhar 2010 (11) SCR 1167 = 2011 (1) SCC 1 – referred
to 2.7. This Court is, therefore, of the view that since the Advance Tax payable by an assessee is an estimate of his "current income" for the relevant financial year, it is not the actual total income, to be disclosed in the return of income~ The vital distinction being that the "current
income" is an estimation or approximation, which may not be accurate or final; whereas the "total income" is the exact income disclosed in a valid return, assessable by the Revenue. The fact that the "current income" is an
estimation implies that it is not final and is subject to further adjustments in the form of additions or reductions, as the case may be, and would have to be succeeded by the disclosure of final and total income in a valid return. It will be a misconstruction of the law to construe the
undisclosed income for purposes of Chapter XIVB as an "estimate" of the total income, which is assessable and chargeable to tax. Therefore, it cannot be said that payment of Advance Tax based on "current income"
involves the disclosure of "total income'', as defined in s. A 2(45) of the Act, which has to be stated in the return of income. The same is evidenced in the scheme of Chapter XIV8, in particular. [para 37] [323-8-F]
2.8. Thus, for the purposes of computation of undisclosed income under Chapter XIV8, an assessee 8 can rebut the Assessing Officer's finding of undisclosed income by showing that such income was di~closed in
the return of income filed by him before the commencement of search or the requisition. When s. 15888(3) is read with s. 1588(b), which defines C undisclosed income, one reaches the conclusion that for
income to be considered as disclosed income, the same should have been disclosed in the return filed by the assessee before the search or requisition. On failure to file return of income by the due date u/s 139 of the Act,
D payment of Advance Tax per se cannot indicate the intention of an assessee to disclose his income.[para 39] [323-H; 324-A-C] 2.9. In the instant case, after the search was E conducted on 23.2.2006, it was found that for the
assessment year 1995-96, the respondent-assessee had not filed its return of income by the due date. It is only when block assessment proceedings were initiated by the assessing officer, that the assessee filed its return for the F said assessment year on 11.7.1996 u/s 1588C of the Act,
showing its total income. The assessee claimed, that since Advance Tax had been paid in three instalments, it could not have been said that the income had not been disclosed or that there was no intention to disclose
G income. [para 41] [324-F-H; 325-A] 2.10. The payment of Advance Tax, which is based upon estimated income, cannot tantamount to the disclosure of the total income, which must be declared
in the return. [para 41] [325-A] ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI v. A.R. ENTERPRISES 2.11. The fact that the assessee had not fil~d its return of income by the due date, the Assessing Officer
was correct in assuming that the assessee would not have disclosed its total income. Therefore, the decision of the High Court cannot be sustained. [para 41] [325-B] C.A. No. 2580/2010
2.12. Since the tax to be deducted at source is also computed on the estimated income of an assessee for the relevant financial year, mere deduction of tax at source, also, does not amount to disclosure of income,
nor does it indicate the intention to disclose income most definitely when the same is not disclosed in the returns filed for the assessment year concerned. [para 44] [325- F; 326-A-B]
3. The impugned judgments are set aside. [para 45] [326-8] B. Noorsingh Vs. Union of India & Ors. (2001) 249 ITR 378 – cited Case Law Reference: (2001) 249 ITR 378 cited para 7 2007 (3) SCR 61
referred to para 13 2010 (2) SCR 282 relied on para 14 2010 (11) SCR 1167 referred to para 34 [2003] 264 ITR 7 44 (Raj) referred to para 35 191 (2012) DLT 249 referred to para 35 [2011] 333 ITR 464 (Born)
referred to para 35 [2009] 312 ITR 161 (Ker) referred to para 35 [2000) 243 ITR 519 (Kar) referred to para 35 [2006] 284 ITR 434 (SC) referred to para 35 para 36 [2005] 279 ITR 123 (P&H)
approved CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 2688 of 2006. From the Judgment & Order dated 8.9.2004 of the High Court of Judicature at Madras in Tax Case (Appeal) No. 238 of 2000.
WITH C C.A. Nos. 3127, 3848 of 2006, 2580 of 2010, 270 & 271 of 2013. Harish Chandra, Rahul Kaushik, Priya Hingorani, Yatinder Chaudhary, Utkarsh Malhotra, B.V. Balaram Das, Anil Katiyar D for the Appellant.
V. Prabhakar, Revathy Raghavan, Jyoti Prashar, Nikhil Swami, Prabha Swami for the Respodent. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by D.K. JAIN, J. 1. Leave granted in all the Special Leave
Petitions. 2. This batch of six appeals, arises from separate F judgments of the High Court of Madras in the appeals preferred by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short "the Act") rendered in Tax Case (Appeal) Nos.238 of 2000 on 8th September 2004; 1371, 1372, 1373 of 2005 on
2nd January 2006; 687 of 2007 on 18th June 2007; and 620 of 2009 on 21st July 2009. This judgment shall govern all these G appeals since they entail a common substantial question of law, as is evident from the adjudication of the High Court. However, to appreciate the issue involved, Civil Appeal No.2688 of 2006 is treated as the lead case At the outset we may note that despite service of notice, no appearance was entered for the H respondent-assesses, except in C.A. No. 2688/2006 and C.A. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,
CHENNAI v. A.R. ENTERPRISES [D.K. JAIN, J.] No. 2580/2010. Facts 3. The respondent-assessee is a firm which came into existence on 25th June, 1992. On 23rd February, 1996, a search operation under Section 132 of the Act was carried out at the premises of another concern, viz. Mis A.R. Mercantile Private Limited. During the course of search, certain books and documents pertaining to the assessee i. e. Mis A.R.
Enterprises, were seized. On scrutiny, the Assessing Officer found that though the assessee had taxable income for ttie assessment year 1995-96, no return of income had been filed (due to be filed on or before 31st October, 1995) till the date of search. Based on the material seized by virtue of the
aforesaid search, the Assessing Officer was satisfied that the assessee had not disclosed their income pertaining to the assessment year 1995-96. Accordingly (without recording any reasons for his satisfaction), he initiated action under Section 15880 of the Act requiring the assessee to file their return of income. The assessee, after filing return for the block period (ten years preceding the previous year), which covered
assessment years 1993-94 to 1995-96, pointed out that they had already filed returns for the assessment years 1993-94 and 1994-95. They objected to action initiat~d under Chapter XIVB of the Act on the ground that in relation to the assessment year 1995-96, Advance Tax had already been paid in three
installments and, therefore, income for that period could not be deemed to be undisclosed. 4. Rejecting the plea of the assessee, the Assessing Officer formed the opinion that the assessee had failed to file the return as on the date of search, and the seized documents did show income, which had not been or would not have been declared. Accordingly, he proceeded to compute total
undisclosed income for the block period 1993-94 to 1995-96 (upto the date of search), treating the income returned by the assessee for the period 1995-96 as NIL, as stipulated in (2013] 1 S.C.R.
A Section 158BB (1)(c) of the Act. 5. Against the said order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal. Accepting the stand of the assessee, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, and held that having B paid the Advance Tax, the assessee had disclosed his income for the relevant assessment year. The Tribunal observed thus: "Now coming to the facts of the present case, as stated
supra, the assessee has not filed his return in time, but even after that date the assessee has filed his return voluntarily. Moreover not only that the assessee has also estimated his income for the year and paid advance tax
thereon as detailed below: 15.09.1994 Bank of Baroda, Rs.1,60,000 T.Nagard. 12.12.1994 -do- Rs.1,60,000 16.03.1994 -do- Rs.1,60,000 Rs.4,80,000 This would indicate that the assessee has made known
to the income tax department his income for the year and also paid the income tax thereon well before the due dates and of course well before the date of search also. Even this fact of income was voluntarily disclosed by the
assessee to the ADI (inv.) … " Consequently, the Tribunal declared the said assessment, made under Section 158BD of the Act, as null and void. 6. Being dissatisfied, the Revenue preferred an appeal
before the High Court of Madras under Section 260A of the Act, questioning the validity of the order of the Tribunal. Entertaining the appeal, the High Court formulated the following substantial question of law for adjudication:
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI v. A.R. ENTERPRISES [D.K. JAIN, J.] "Whether the Appellate Tribunal is rigbt in law in cancelling the assessment under Chapter XIV-B in light of the specific provision contained in Section 15888(1) (c) ofthe Income
Tax Act?" 7. Before the High Court, the stand of the Revenue was that since return for the assessment year 1995-96 had not been filed by the due date, by filing the return after the search, the assessee could not escape the consequences as stipulated in Chapter XIVB of the Act. It was contended that payment of
Advance Tax by itself did not establish the intention to disclose the income. In support of the proposition, reliance was placed on the decision of the High Court of Madras in B. Noorsingh Vs. Union of India & Ors. 1• In that judgment, the High Court had observed:
" … Counsel submitted that in cases (sic) whereas in the o case of the present petitioner, the assessee had paid advance tax, such payment would clearly indicate his intention to disclose his income and it could not be said
that such person would not have disclosed his income. The payment of advance tax by itself does not establish an intent to disclose the income. The disclosure is to be made by filing the return. Even in search cases where the time
for filing the return under section 139(1) has not expired, income disclosed in the books of account is not treated as undisclosed income. All that is denied to the assessee in search cases is the opportunity to file a return after the period specified in section 139(1) and to claim that the
income that he would have disclosed in a belated return is not to be regarded as undisclosed income. The reason for denying such opportunity in search cases is obvious. After having suffered a search, the assessee is not to be
enabled to escape the consequences of his failure to disclose all his income by filing a return after the search 1. (2001) 249 ITR 378. and after the expiry of the time prescribed under section
139(1) and by disclosing therein income which had remained undisclosed upto the date of the search." 8. Revenue's plea did not find favour with the High Court. lnter-alia, observing that payment of Advance Tax itself
8 necessarily implies disclosure of the income on which the c advance is paid, the High Court held as follows: "Under clause (d) of sub-section(1) of section 15888 while assessing the aggregate of the total income, the income
recorded in the books of account and other documents maintained in the normal course on or before the date of the search or requisition relating to such previous year shall be taken into consideration where the previous year has
not ended or the date of filing the return of the income under sub-section (1) of section 139 has not expired. When the assessee is required to file the self-assessment for payment of the advance tax before the income-tax
authorities the return of assessment would fall within the documents maintained in the normal course by the assessee and as such the income disclosed on payment of the advance tax would fall within clause (d) of sub-
section (1) of section 15888. In any case although there is a difference between the regular assessment and the block assessment, as we have already noticed, unless the provisions of the block assessment specifically bar the
assessing authority from taking into consideration the income disclosed by the assessee on payment of the advance tax to be taken into consideration, the income disclosed by the assessee on payment of advance tax
would be an income disclosed to the Revenue and cannot be treated as an income undisclosed for the relevant assessment year." 9. Aggrieved thereby, as aforesaid, the Revenue is before
us in these appeals. ASSISTANT COMMISSION.ER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI v. A.R. ENTERPRISES [D.K. JAIN, J.] 10. The short question for consideration is whether A payment of Advance Tax by an assessee would by itself
tantamount to disclosure of income for the relevant assessment year and whether such income can be treated as undisclosed income for the purpose of application of Chapter XIV8 of the Scope of Chapter XIV-B and its Provisions
11. Sections 132 and 132A of the Act incorporate provision of search, ~eizure and requisition which were resorted to for the conduct of search at the premises of M/s A.R. Mercantile Pvt. Ltd. For the evaluation of the material seized during the operation or proceedings under Sections 132 or
132A of the Act, as the case may be, the provisions contained in Chapter XIV-8 come into play. This chapter, consisting of sections 1588 to 1588H was inserted by the Finance Act, 1995 D with effect from 1.07.1995. The heading of Chapter XIV-8
reads "Special Procedure for Assessment of Search Cases". It was introduced for the assessment of undisclosed income determined as a result of search carried out under Section 132 of the Act or requisitioning of documents or assets under E Section 132A of the Act. The chapter is a self-contained code and gets attracted as a result of search proceedings initiated by the income tax authorities, under Section 132 of the Act, notwithstanding any other provisions of the Act except to the extent provided for in the chapter.
12. In the facts before us, resort to this chapter was required to be made since on conduct of search at the premises of M/s A.R. Mercantile Pvt. Ltd., documents of M/s A.R. Enterprises, i.e. the assessee were recovered, that indicated non-disclosure of income by the latter. In such a scenario, G Section 15880 gets attracted, which reads as follows:
"Undisclosed income of any other person. 15880. Where the Assessing Officer is satisfied that any undisclosed income belongs to any person, other than the person with respect to whom search was made under
section 132 or whose books of account or other documents or any assets were requisitioned under section 132A, then, the books of account, other documents or assets seized or requisitioned shall be handed over to the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction over such other
person and that Assessing Officer shall proceed [under section 158BC] against such other person and the provisions of this Chapter shall apply accordingly." 13. A bare reading of the afore-extracted provision makes
C it clear that the condition precedent for invoking a block assessment is a search conducted under Section 132, or documents or assets requisitioned under Section 132-A. Moreover, Section 15880 permits the application of the
provisions of this chapter only on the satisfaction of the assessing officer that the seized documents show undisclosed income of a person other than the person with respect to whom search was conducted or a requisition was made. It is trite law that such satisfaction must be recorded for the benefit of the assessee. In Manish Maheshwari Vs. Asstt. Commissioner of
E Income Tax & Anr.2, this Court summarized the prerequisites of Section 15880 of the Act as follows: "11 .. .. (1) satisfaction must be recorded by the assessing officer that any undisclosed income belongs to any person, other than the person with respect to whom search was
made under Section 132 of the Act; (it) the books of accounts or other documents or assets seized or requisitioned had been handed over to the assessing officer having jurisdiction over such other person; and (iit) the assessing officer has proceeded under Section 158-
BC against such other person." 14. In Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Hotel Blue Moon3, one of us (H.L. Oattu, J.) while explaining the 2. (2007) 3 sec 794. 3. (2010) 3 sec 259 at page 264.
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI v. AR. ENTERPRISES [D.K. JAIN, J.] purport of Chapter XIV8 of the Act, has observed that a search is the sine qua non for the block assessment; the special
provisions are devised to operate in the distinct field of undisclosed income and are clearly in addition to the regular assessments covering the previous years falling in the block period, intended to provide a mode of assessment of
undisclosed income, which has been detected as a result of search. Hence, from the aforementioned discussion it is clear that a valid search under Section 132 of the Act is a sine qua non for invoking block assessment proceedings under Chapter XIV8. Further according to Section 15880 of the Act the
assessing officer m,ust record his or her satisfaction that any undisclosed income belongs to any person, other than the person with respect to whom search was made under Section 132 of the Act.
15. It seems that these requisites were in fact not adhered to in the present case. During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the assessee did contend that the Revenue did not have jurisdiction to invoke Chapter XIV8 of the Act, against the assessee. According to the learned counsel, before initiating proceedings under Section 15880 of the Act, the assessing
officer had not recorded his satisfaction that any undisclosed income belonged to the assessee or that the assessee did not have the intention to disclose their income. Hence, the block assessment proceedings against the assessee should be
quashed. However, we are unable to appreciate the submission of the learned counsel at this stage, since the same was never urged before the High Court and the Tribunal. Hence, we refrain from making any observations on a contention that had never been argued before the High Court and the Tribunal. We shall restrict our opinion strictly to the issue before us, viz. whether the payment of Advance Tax for the relevant
assessment year is tantamount to disclosure of income for the purpose of application of Chapter XIV8 of the Act. 16. The relevant provisions for assessment, computation A and procedure of block assessment, which would come into play on the application of Section 15880, in their erstwhile form at the relevant time, read as follows: –
c "Assessment of undisclosed income as a result of search. 158BA. (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other provisions of this Act, where after the 30th day of June, 1995 a search is initiated under section 132 or
books of account, other documents or any assets are requisitioned under section 132A in the case of any person, then, the Assessing Officer shall proceed to assess the undisclosed income in accordance with the
provisions of this Chapter. Procedure for block assessment. 158BC. Where any search has been conducted under section 132 or books of account, other documents or assets are requisitioned under section 132A, in the case
of any person, then,- (a) the Assessing Officer shall- (1) in respect of search initiated or books of account or other documents or any assets requisitioned after the 30th day of June, 1995, but before the 1st
day of January, 1997, serve a notice to such person requiring him to furnish within such time not being less than fifteen days; xxxxxx xxx (b) the Assessing Officer shall proceed to determine
the undisclosed income of the block period in the manner laid down in section 15888 and the provisions of section 142, sub-sections (2) and (3) of section 143 section 144 and section 145 shall,
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI v. A.R. ENTERPRISES [D.K. JAIN, J.] so far as may be, apply; … " [Emphasis supplied] 17. Section 1588 of the Act, which encompasses the crux
of the issue, reads as follows: "Definitions. 1588. In this Chapter, unless the context otherwise requires, -\ (a) "block period" means the previous years relevant to ten assessment years preceding the previous year in which
the search was conducted under section 132 or any requisition was made under section 132A, and includes, in the previous year in which such search was conducted or requisition made, the period up to the date of the
commencement of such search or, as the case may be, the date of such requisition; (b) "Undisclosed income" includes any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing or any income · E based on any entry in the books of account or other
documents or transactions, where such money, bullion, jewellery, valuable article, thing, entry in the books of account or other document or transaction represents wholly or partly income or property which has not been or would
not have been disclosed for the purposes of this Act." [Emphasis supplied] 18. The genesis of the issue before us lies within the folds of this section. Sections 15880 and 1588C, along with the rest of Chapter XIV-B, find application only in the event of discovery of "undisclosed income" of an assessee. Undisclosed income is defined by Section 1588 as that income "which has not been or would not have been disclosed for the purposes of this Acf'. The legislature has chosen to define "undisclosed income" in A terms of income not disclosed, without providing any definition of "disclosure" of income in the first place. We are of the view that the only way of disclosing income, on the part of an
assessee, is through filing of a return, as stipulated in the Act, and therefore an "undisclosed income" signifies income not B stated in the return filed. Keeping that in mind, it seems that the legislature has clearly carved out two scenarios for income to be deemed as undisclosed: (i) where the income has clearly not been disclosed and (ii) where the income would not have been disclosed. If a situation is covered by any one of the two, C income would be undisclosed in the eyes of the Act and hence subject to the machinery provisions of Chapter XIVB. The
second category, viz. where income would not have been disclosed, contemplates the likelihood of disclosure; it is a presumption of the intention of the assessee since in concluding 0 that an assessee would or would not have disclosed income, one is ipso facto making a statement with respect to whether or not the assessee possessed the intention to do the same. To gauge this, however, reliance must be placed on the
surrounding facts and circumstances of the case. 19. One such fact, as the assessee claims, is the payment of Advance Tax. However, in our opinion, the degree of its material significance depends on the time at which the search is conducted in relation to the due date for filing return. Depending on which side of the due date the search is
F conducted, material significance of payment of Advance Taxes vacillates in construing the intention of the assessee. If the search is conducted after the expiry of the due date for filing return, payment of Advance Tax is irrelevant in construing the intention of the assessee to disclose income. Such a situation G would find place within the first category carved out by Section 1588 of the Act i.e. where income has clearly not been
disclosed. The possibility of the intention to disclose does not arise since, as held earlier, the opportunity of disclosure has lapsed i.e. through filing of return of income by the due date. If, H on the other hand, search is conducted prior to the due date ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,
CHENNAI v. A.R. ENTERPRISES [D.K. JAIN, J.] for filing return, the opportunity to disclose income or, in other words, to file return and disclose income still persists. In which case, payment of Advance Tax may be a material fact for
construing whether an assessee intended to disclose. An assessee is entitled to make the legitimate claim that even though the search or the documents recovered, show an income earned by him, he has paid Advance Tax for the relevant assessment year and has an opportunity to declare the total income, in the return of income, which he would file by the due date. Hence, the fulcrum of such a decision is the due date for filing of return of income vis-a-vis date of search. Payment of c Advance Tax may be a relevant factor in construing intention to disclose income or filing return as long as the assessee continues to have the opportunity to file return and disclose his income and not past the due date of filing return. Therefore, there can be no generic rule as to the significance of payment of Advance Tax in construing intention of disclosure of income. The same depends on the facts of the case, and hinges on the positioning of the search operations qua the due date for filing returns.
20. Thus, at the very outset, in our view, the question that whether payment of Advance Tax by an assessee per se is tantamount to disclosure of total income, for the relevant assessment year, must be answered in the negative. On further scrutiny, we find yet another reason to opine so. Payment of Advance Tax and filing of return are functions of completely different notions of income i.e. estimated income and total income respectively. The payment of Advance Tax is based on an estimation of the total income that is chargeable to tax and not on the total income itself.
21. Section 2(45) of Act defines "total income" as- "total income" means the total amount of income referred to in section 5, computed in the manner laid down in this Act;" 22. Section 5 of the Act lays down the "scope of total
income" as- "5. (1) Subject to the provisions of this Act, the total income of any previous year of a person who is a resident includes all income from whatever source derived which-
(a) is received or is deemed to be received in India in such year by or on behalf of such person ; or (b) accrues or arises or is deemed to accrue or arise to c him in India during such year ; or
(c) accrues or arises to him outside India during such year 23. Section 15888(1) of the Act provides the method of D computation of undisclosed income for a block period. It is significant to note that the computation of the undisclosed income of the block period shall be the aggregate of the total income of the previous years falling within the block period, computed in accordance with the provisions of the Act. This E amount is reduced by the aggregate of the total income, or as increased by the losses returned or determined earlier, in respect of such previous years in accordance with the
provisions of this section. 24. Section 15888(1) reads as follows- "15888. (1) The undisclosed income of the block period shall be the aggregate of the total income of the previous years falling within the block period computed, in
accordance with the provisions of this Act, on the basis of evidence found as a result of search or requisition of books of account or other documents and such other materials or information as are available with the Assessing Officer and relatable to such evidence, as reduced by the
aggregate of the total income, or as the case may be, as increased by the aggregate of the losses of such previous ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI v. A.R. ENTERPRISES [D.K. JAIN, J.]
years, determined,- (a) XXX (b) xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx (c) where the due date for filing a return of income has 8 expired but no return of income has been filed. as nil 25. Further, the explanation to Section 15888(1) reads-
" Explanation: For the purposes of determination of undisclosed income,- (a) the total income or loss of each previous year shall, for the purpose of aggregation, be taken as the total income
or loss computed in accordance with the provisions of Chapter IV without giving effect to set off of brought forward o losses under Chapter VI or unabsorbed depreciation under ' sub-section (2) of section 32;
(b) of a firm, or its partners, the method of computation of undisclosed income and its allocation to the partners shall E be in accordance with the method adopted for determining
the assessed income or returned income for each of the previous years falling within the block period; … " 26. Hence, the computation of "undisclosed income" for the purposes of Chapter XIV8 has to be construed in terms of the "total income" received, accrued, arisen; or which is deemed to have been received, accrued or arisen in the previous year, and is computed according to the provisions of the Act.
According to Section 139( 1) of the Act, every person who is assessable under the Act, must file a return declaring his or her G total income during the previous year on or before the due date, for assessment under Section 143 of the Act. Hence, the
'disclosure of income' is the disclosure of the total income in a valid return under Section 139, subject to assessment and chargeable to tax under the provisions of the Act. It is important H A to bear in mind that total income is distinct from the estimated income, upon the basis of which, Advance Tax is paid by an assessee. Advance Tax is based on estimated income, and
hence, it cannot result in the disclosure of the total income assessable and chargeable to tax. 27. Before we proceed further to elaborate upon this distinction, it would be useful to refer to the provisions relating to payment of Advance Tax under the Act. Chapter XVII of the Act, which deals with "Collection and Recovery of Tax'', contains provisions for the payment of Advance Tax and tax deducted C at source. Advance Tax is the tax payable on the estimated total income of the relevant financial year which is chargeable to tax in the assessment year but is payable in that very financial year. 28. Section 207 of the Act lays down the liability for
D payment of Advance Tax as:- "207. Tax shall be payable in advance during any financial year, in accordance with the provisions of sections 208 to 219 (both inclusive), in respect of the total income of the assessee which would be chargeable to tax for the
assessment year immediately following that financial year, such income being hereafter in this Chapter referred to as "current income." 29. Section 208 specifies the conditions of liability to pay F Advance Tax as:-
"208. Advance tax shall be payable during a financial year in every case where the amount of such tax payable by the assessee during that year, as computed in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter, is one thousand five hundred rupees or more."
30. Thus, in every case where the amount of tax payable on the total income earned during the financial year is one thousand five hundred rupees or more, then, an assessee would H be liable to pay in the financial year itself, Advance Tax on such ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,
CHENNAI v. AR. ENTERPRISES [D.K. JAIN, J.] income, also known as "current income." It is in this context the following questions arise: (i) What is the nature of the "current income" upon which the Advance Tax is paid and is it the same as the total income? and (ii) Whether the payment of Advance Tax results in the disclosure of the actual total income?
31. Section 210(1) of the Act refers to the payment of Advance Tax by the assessee of his own accord:- "210. (1) Every person who is liable to pay advance tax under section 208 (whether or not he has been previously
assessed by way of regular assessment) shall, of his own C accord, pay, on or before each of the due dates specified in section 211, the appropriate percentage, specified in that section, of the advance tax on his current income,
calculated in the manner laid down in section 209." 32. Section 209(1 )(a) lays down the method of computation of Adva,nce Tax to be paid by an assessee as follows: "209. [(1) The amount of advance tax payable by an
assessee in the financial year shall, subject to the E provisions of sub-sections (2) and (3), be computed as follows, namely :- (a) where the calculation is made by the assessee for the
purposes of payment of advance tax under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) or sub-section (5) or sub-section (6) of section 210, he shall first estimate his current income and income-tax thereon shall be calculated at the rates in force in the financial year .. "
33. According to Section 210(1) of the Act, every person G who is liable to pay Advance Tax under Section 208 (whether or not he has been previously assessed by way of regular assessment) shall, of his own accord, pay Advance Tax on his "current income", calculated in the manner laid down in section 209. Further according to Section 209(1)(a), the assessee shall first estimate his "current income" and thereafter pay income tax calculated on this estimated income on the rates in force in the relevant financial year. It is significant to note that this income is an estimation that is made by the assessee and may not be the exact income, which may ultimately be declared in the return under Section 139 and assessed under Section 143 of the Act. Needless to emphasise that payment of Advance
Tax does not absolve an assessee from an obligation to file return disclosing total income for the relevant assessment year. In short, the disclosure of total income by the filing of return c under Section 139 of the Act is mar:idatory even after the payment of Advance Tax by an assessee, since the "current
income" which forms the basis of the Advance Tax is a mere estimation and not the final total income for the relevant assessment year liable to be assessed. 34. In Brij Lal & Ors. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Jalandhar', while explaining the scope of the provisions on Advance Tax, this Court expressed the view that the "current income" in respect of which the assessee pays Advance Tax is not the same as understood in Section 2(45). In this regard, the Court held:
"8. Liability to pay advance tax arises under Section 207. The said section is based on the principle "pay as you earn". It requires tax to be paid during the financial year. It has to be in respect of the total income of the assessee
which would be chargeable to tax under the Act. The said total income is not as understood in Section 2(45) but it is equated to "current income" for the purposes of Chapter XVII. After the amending Act of 1987. advance tax is to
be paid on the current income which would be chargeable to tax for the assessment year immediately following the financial year. Section 210 casts the responsibility of payment of advance tax on the assessee without requiring
the assessee to submit his estimate of advance tax 4. c2011) 1sec1. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI v. AR. ENTERPRISES [D.K. JAIN, J.] payable. Provision for payment of advance tax is a mode A
of quick collection of tax. 9. Thus, Section 207 defines liability to pay advance tax in respect of incomes referred to in Section 208. However, advance tax paid is adjustable towards the tax due.
Advance tax is collected even before the income tax becomes due and payable. By its very nature, advance tax is pre-assessment collection of taxes either by deduction of tax at source or by payment of advance tax which has
to be adjusted towards income tax levied on the total C income. The above two methods of realisation even before any assessment is authorised by Section 4(2) are incorporated in Chapter XVII which deals with "collection
and recovery". 15. Now, Chapter XVII deals with "collection and recovery". It covers tax deduction at source and advance payment of taxes (see Section 190). Part C Chapter XVII deals with
advance payment of taxes. Section 207 refers to liability to pay advance tax whereas Section 209 deals with computation of advance tax. Section 215 refers to interest E payable by the assessee. Section 210(1) inter alia
provides that every person who is liable to pay interest (sic advance tax) under Section 208, shall of his own accord pay, on each of the due dates specified in Section 211, the appropriate percentage of advance tax on his current
income calculated in the manner under Section 209." 35. A catena of decisions by various High Courts has reiterated that the Advance Tax payable under Chapter XVII is based on an estimate of the total income of the assessee for the relevant financial year, and is not the final "total income" G which must be disclosed for assessment through the filing of a return under Section 139 of the Act in the following assessment year. An estimate always has an element of guesswork. There could be various reasons due to which an estimate may be
faulty and inaccurate which is wby, there is a provision for H A payment of interest on deficient or excess payment of advance tax when there is variation between advance tax paid and
actual liability to tax. [See: Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Smt. Premlata Jalani5, Bill & Peggy Marketing India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax6, Prime Securities B Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax7 ,
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Nilgiri Tea Estate Ltd. 8, Kwality Biscuits Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax9 which was subsequently affirmed in Commissioner of Income Tax c Vs. Kwality Biscuits Ltd. 10].
36. The Punjab and Haryana High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Upper India Steel Mfg. and Engg. Co. Ltd. 11 made the following important observations: "24. We fully concur with the view expressed in the
aforesaid judgments. The Madras High Court has correctly pointed out that for the purpose of payment of advance tax, all assessees including companies, are required to make an estimate of their current income. Even before the
introduction of the provisions of Section 115J of the Act, companies had been estimating their total income after providing deductions admissible under the Act. In fact, all assessees who maintain books of account have to
undertake this exercise for the purpose of payment of advance tax. If a profit and loss account can be drawn up on estimate basis for the purpose of Income-tax Act, it is not understood as to why a similar profit and loss account on estimate basis under the Companies Act cannot be
5. [2003] 264 ITR 744 (Raj). 6. 191 (2012) DLT 249. 7. [2011] 333 ITR 464 (Born). 8. [2009] 312 ITR 161 (Ker). 9. [2000] 243 ITR 519 (Kar). 10. [2006) 284 ITR 434 (SC). 11. [2005] 279 ITR 123 (P&H).
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI v. A.R. ENTERPRISES [D.K. JAIN, J.] drawn up. If the explanation of the companies that the A profits under Section 11 SJ of the Act can only be
determined after the close of the year were to be accepted, then no assessee who maintai~s regular books of account would be liable to pay advance tax as in those cases also, income can only be determined after the close of the books of account at the end of the year."'
37. We are, therefore, of the view that since the Advance Tax payable by an assessee is an estimate of his "current income" for the relevant financial year, it is not the actual total C income, to be disclosed in the return of income. To repeat, the vital distinction being that the "current income" is an estimation or approximation, which may not be accurate or final; whereas the "total income" is the exact income disclosed in a valid return, assessable by the Revenue. The fact that the "current income" is an estimation implies that it is not final and is subject to D further adjustments in the form of additions or reductions, as the case may be, and would have to be succeeded by the
disclosure of final and total income in a valid return. It will be a misconstruction of the law to construe the undisclosed income for purposes of Chapter XIVB as an "estimate" of the total income, which is assessable and chargeable to tax. Therefore, we are unable to accept that payment of Advance Tax based
on "current income" involves the disclosure of "total income", as defined in Section 2(45) of the Act, which has to be stated in the return of income. The same is evidenced in the scheme of Chapter XIVB, in particular.
38. Section 15888(3) of the Act states- (3) The burden of proving to the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer that any undisclosed income had G already been disclosed in any return of income filed by the assessee before the commencement of search or of the
requisition, as the case may be, shall be on the assessee. 39. Thus, for the purposes of computation of undisclosed income under Chapter XIV8, an assessee can rebut the Assessing Officer's finding of undisclosed income by showing that such income was disclosed in the return of income filed by him before the commencement of search or the requisition. In other words, when Section 15888(3) is read with Section 1588(b), which defines undisclosed income, we reach the
conclusion that for income to be considered as disclosed income, the same should have been disclosed in the return filed by the assessee before the search or requisition. In our opinion, on failure to file return of income by the due date under Section c 139 of the Act, payment of Advance Tax per se cannot indicate the intention of an assessee to disclose his income.
40. If we were to hold that the payment of Advance Tax reflects the intention of the assessee to disclose its income, it could result in a situation where the mandatory obligation of filing a return for disclosure of income under the provisions of the Act, would not be necessary. It will be open to an assessee to contend that payment of Advance Tax is tantamount to
disclosure of income. Such a proposition would be contrary to the very purpose of filing of return, which ultimately leads to assessment of total income for the relevant assessment year. Any anomaly in the return entails serious consequences, which may not otherwise be attracted on estimation of income for the purpose of payment of Advance Tax. It would thus, be difficult to accept the plea that payment of Advance Tax is tantamount to the disclosure of income or that it indicates the intention of the assessee to disclose income.
41. In the instant case, after the search was conducted on 23rd February 2006, it was found that for the assessment year 1995-96, the respondent-assessee had not filed its return of income by the due date. It is only when block assessment
proceedings were initiated by the assessing officer, that the assessee filed its return for the said assessment year on 11th July, 1996 under Section 1588C of the Act, showing its total income as Rs.7,02,768/-. The assessee claimed, that since
H Advance Tax had been paid in three installments, it could not ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI v. A.R. ENTERPRISES [D.K. JAIN, J.] have been said that the income had not been disclosed or that there was no intention to disclose income. We have already held that the payment of Advance Tax, which is based upon
estimated income, cannot tantamount to the disclosure of the total income, which must be declared in the return. In our opinion, the fact that the assessee had not filed its return of income by the due date, the Assessing Officer was correct in assuming that the assessee would not have disclosed its total income. For all these reasons, the decision of the High Court cannot be sustained.
42. Lastly, since C.A. No. 2580/201 O refers to a slightly different issue, we deem it fit to record our observations with respect to the same. In this appeal, the issue is whether tax deducted at source (and not payment of Advance Tax) amounts to the disclosure of income.
43. Section 190 of the Act states- 190 (1) Notwithstanding that the regular assessment in respect of any income is to be made in a later assessment year, the tax on such income sha!I be payable by
deduction 12 [or collection] at source or by advance payment13 [or by payment under sub-section (1A) of section 192], as the case may be, in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter.
(2) Nothing in thi~ section shall prejudice the charge of tax oo such income under the provisions of sub-section (1) of section 4. 44. Since the tax to be deducted at source is also
computed on the estimated income of an assessee for the relevant financial year, such deduction cannot result in the disclosure of the total income for the relevant assessment year. 12. Inserted by the Direct Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1989, w.r.e.f. 1-6-1988. 13. Inserted by the Finance Act, 2002, w.e.f. 1-6-2002.
A Subject to the monetary limit of the total income, every person is obligated to file his return of income even after tax is deducted at source. Hence, for the reasons stated in the
preceding paragraphs, we are of the opinion that mere deduction of tax at source, also, does not amount to disclosure B of income, nor does it indicate the intention to disclose income most definitely when the same is not disclosed in the returns filed for the concerned assessment year.
45. Consequently, we allow the appeals; set aside the impugned judgments and answer the question formulated by the C High Court, extracted in para 6 (supra), in favour of the Revenue. The Revenue shall be entitled to costs, quantified at Rs.50,000/ – in each set of appeals.
R.P. Appeals allowed