Proman Ltd. v. DCIT

95 ITD 489Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2005#9939 most cited

What is Proman Ltd. v. DCIT authority for?

An Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) cannot adjudicate on the validity of a search conducted under section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, when disposing of an appeal against a block assessment.

11

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Proman Ltd. v. DCIT · section 132 · section 153A · validity of search · block assessment · ITAT jurisdiction · appeal against block assessment

Sections most often in play

Section 112(1)Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 158BCSection 292BSection 68

Issues it is cited on

section 132(1)(a)section 132(2)section 133(a)section 153(a)(1)section 250(1)warrant of authorisationabatement of assessmentsection 153a proceedingsannual letting valuesection 158bdsection 52section 153(a)

Judgments citing Proman Ltd. v. DCIT

ACIT, Central Circle- 15, New Delhi vs. Focus Buildwell Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2273/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Shri V.K. Agarwal, AR &For Respondent: Ms Monika Singh, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 68

…ssue of authorization by the DIT. 'Execution' of search warrant, which is a step after the initiation of search, takes place later on, which leads to the actual conduct of the search at the premises of the person searched. 10.1 In Promain Ltd. V. DCIT [2005] 95 ITD 489 (Del. Trib.)(SB) the law is settled as follows; "...the Legislature has used two words 'initiated' and 'conducted' with reference to the search under section 132. The word 'initiated' is understood in legal sense as 'commenced' while the word 'conduct' is understood as 'carry on'. If these words are read together, it would mean commencement of sea…

ACIT, Central Circle- 15, New Delhi vs. Focus Buildwell Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2272/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Shri V.K. Agarwal, AR &For Respondent: Ms Monika Singh, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 68

…ssue of authorization by the DIT. 'Execution' of search warrant, which is a step after the initiation of search, takes place later on, which leads to the actual conduct of the search at the premises of the person searched. 10.1 In Promain Ltd. V. DCIT [2005] 95 ITD 489 (Del. Trib.)(SB) the law is settled as follows; "...the Legislature has used two words 'initiated' and 'conducted' with reference to the search under section 132. The word 'initiated' is understood in legal sense as 'commenced' while the word 'conduct' is understood as 'carry on'. If these words are read together, it would mean commencement of sea…

ACIT, Central Circle- 15, New Delhi vs. Focus Buildwell Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2271/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Shri V.K. Agarwal, AR &For Respondent: Ms Monika Singh, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 68

…ssue of authorization by the DIT. 'Execution' of search warrant, which is a step after the initiation of search, takes place later on, which leads to the actual conduct of the search at the premises of the person searched. 10.1 In Promain Ltd. V. DCIT [2005] 95 ITD 489 (Del. Trib.)(SB) the law is settled as follows; "...the Legislature has used two words 'initiated' and 'conducted' with reference to the search under section 132. The word 'initiated' is understood in legal sense as 'commenced' while the word 'conduct' is understood as 'carry on'. If these words are read together, it would mean commencement of sea…

DCIT, Central Circle-1, Lucknow vs. Shri Monish Iqbal, Lucknow

In the result, appeal of Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 231/LKW/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Sept 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

For Appellant: None (Adj. Application filed)For Respondent: Shri. Manu Chaurasia, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 153ASection 260A

…the Id. CIT(A)-III, Lucknow has exceeded his jurisdiction as the validity of search could only be challenged by way of writ petition under article 226/227 of the Constitution of India as held’ by the Special Bench, ITAT, Delhi in Promain Ltd. Vs. Dy.CIT(2005) 95 ITD 489. . 2. That the Ld. CIT (A)-III, Lucknow has erred in law in quashing the assessment on the ground that the assessment could not have been made in the name of the assessee when the warrant of authorization for search are issued in the joint names of the assessee and his wife. Page 2 of 6 2(i) That in doing so, the Ld. CIT (A)-III, Lucknow has reli…

The Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-1, Mangaluru vs. M/S. Blueline Foods (India) Pvt. Ltd., Mangaluru

ITA 182/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Revenue byFor Respondent: Date of hearing
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 255(4)

…but not initiation of search itself.” (Paragraph 24) “…the expression ‘search initiated’ has to be interpreted to mean the commencement and conducting of the ‘initial search’ i.e., the first search in the case…" (Paragraph 26) (ii) Promain Ltd. V. DCIT [2005] 95 ITD 489 (Del. Trib.)(SB): “…the Legislature has used two words ‘initiated’ and ‘conducted’ with reference to the search under section 132. The word ‘initiated’ is understood in legal sense as ‘commenced’ while the word ‘conduct’ is understood as ‘carry on’. If these words are read together, it would mean commencement of search, the actual carrying on/exec…

M/S. Trishul Buildtech & Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Bengaluru

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

ITA 109/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Nov 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri A. Shankar, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manjunath Karkihalli, D.R
Section 250

…he assessee is questioning the validity of search action u/s 132 of the Act and framing of assessment by issue of notice u/s. 153A of the Act. In our opinion, this issue has been settled by the decision of the Special Bench in the case of Proman Ltd. v. DCIT, 95 ITD 489 (Del) (SB) wherein it was held that Tribunal cannot adjudicate upon issue relating to validity of search conducted under section 132 while disposing of appeal against block assessment. 6.1 Further the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of N.K. Jewellers Vs. CIT, New Delhi (2017) 85 taxmann.com 361(SC) held that in view of insertion to section 132(…

M/S. Trishul Buildtech & Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Bengaluru

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

ITA 108/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri A. Shankar, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manjunath Karkihalli, D.R
Section 250

…he assessee is questioning the validity of search action u/s 132 of the Act and framing of assessment by issue of notice u/s. 153A of the Act. In our opinion, this issue has been settled by the decision of the Special Bench in the case of Proman Ltd. v. DCIT, 95 ITD 489 (Del) (SB) wherein it was held that Tribunal cannot adjudicate upon issue relating to validity of search conducted under section 132 while disposing of appeal against block assessment. 6.1 Further the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of N.K. Jewellers Vs. CIT, New Delhi (2017) 85 taxmann.com 361(SC) held that in view of insertion to section 132(…

M/S. Trishul Buildtech & Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Bengaluru

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

ITA 107/BANG/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Nov 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri A. Shankar, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manjunath Karkihalli, D.R
Section 250

…he assessee is questioning the validity of search action u/s 132 of the Act and framing of assessment by issue of notice u/s. 153A of the Act. In our opinion, this issue has been settled by the decision of the Special Bench in the case of Proman Ltd. v. DCIT, 95 ITD 489 (Del) (SB) wherein it was held that Tribunal cannot adjudicate upon issue relating to validity of search conducted under section 132 while disposing of appeal against block assessment. 6.1 Further the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of N.K. Jewellers Vs. CIT, New Delhi (2017) 85 taxmann.com 361(SC) held that in view of insertion to section 132(…

Mr. B.Nagendra, Bellary vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1946/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Mar 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri G.S. Prashant, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 132Section 132(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…rused the material on record. In the present case, the assessee is questioning the validity of search by issue of notice u/s. 153A of the Act. In our opinion, this issue has been settled by the decision of the Special Bench in the case of Proman Ltd. v. DCIT, 95 ITD 489 (Del) (SB) wherein it was held that Tribunal cannot adjudicate upon issue relating to validity of search conducted under section 132 while disposing of appeal against block assessment. 18.1 Further the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of N.K. Jewellers Vs. CIT, New Delhi (2017) 85 taxmann.com 361(SC) held that in view of the amendment made in se…

Mr. B.Nagendra, Belgium vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1945/BANG/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Mar 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri G.S. Prashant, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 132Section 132(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…rused the material on record. In the present case, the assessee is questioning the validity of search by issue of notice u/s. 153A of the Act. In our opinion, this issue has been settled by the decision of the Special Bench in the case of Proman Ltd. v. DCIT, 95 ITD 489 (Del) (SB) wherein it was held that Tribunal cannot adjudicate upon issue relating to validity of search conducted under section 132 while disposing of appeal against block assessment. 18.1 Further the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of N.K. Jewellers Vs. CIT, New Delhi (2017) 85 taxmann.com 361(SC) held that in view of the amendment made in se…

M/S. Jakson Enterprises, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are

ITA 6791/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: - Shri Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: - Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT- DR
Section 14ASection 153ASection 80

…ng decisions: i) CIT vs. Fila Tex India Ltd. - ITA No. 269/2014 dated 14.7.2014 (Del.); ii) Canara Housing Development Co. vs. DCIT - ITA No. 38/2014 dated 25.7.2014 (Karnataka). iii) CIT vs. Anil Kumar Bhatia 24 Taxman.com 98 (Del). iv) Promain Ltd. Vs. DCIT 95 ITD 489 (Del) (SB). v) M.B. Lal 279 ITR 298 (Del) vi) Dr. A.K. Bansal, 355 ITR 513 (All). vii) ITO vs. Varia Pratik Engineering 120 TTJ 1 (Ahd) viii) CIT vs. Raj Kumar Arora, ITA No. 56/2011 (All. H.C.) ix) DCIT vs. Apoorva Extrusion Pvt. Ltd. & ors. ITA Nos. 3308/Del/2010 (A.Y. 2002-03) & ors. Order dated 09.10.2014. 9. Having gone through the orders of…

Proman Ltd. v. DCIT (95 ITD 489) — Cited in 11 Judgments | BharatTax