Value of assets seized in searches by Income Tax Department records rise

As per the data by the Ministry of Finance, the value of assets seized during the year 2021-22 was Rs 880.83 crore which increased to Rs 1,159.59 crore in the year 2021-22 and to Rs 1,533.23 crore in the year 2022-23 (till January 2023, provisional figures), Minister of State for Finance, Pankaj Chaudhary told the Lok Sabha in a reply.

The value of assets seized during searches conducted by the Income Tax Department has shown a rise over the last few years, the Parliament was told on Monday.

As per the data by the Ministry of Finance, the value of assets seized during the year 2021-22 was Rs 880.83 crore which increased to Rs 1,159.59 crore in the year 2021-22 and to Rs 1,533.23 crore in the year 2022-23 (till January 2023, provisional figures), Minister of State for Finance, Pankaj Chaudhary told the Lok Sabha in a reply.

Advertisement

He also said that the Income Tax Act, 1961 has no expression such as "raid". The premises of the persons searched under the provisions of the Act, for suspected and identified large-scale tax evasion, are usually spread across multiple states and geographies. Accordingly, these searches and the amount of unaccounted money seized therein, cannot be attributed to any particular state(s), said the reply.

On the basis of the evidence gathered during search operation and the subsequent investigation, tax assessments are finalized and a tax demand is raised. However, the income assessed and the tax thereupon get crystallised conclusively only when appeals, if any, preferred before the CIT(A), the ITAT, the High Court, and the Supreme Court are decided.

Advertisement

Also read | Government received Rs 20.39L cr till Feb, spent Rs 34.93L cr

Further, the penalty proceedings under the Act are initiated, in applicable cases and these proceedings are also subject to a similar appellate procedure. However, the disclosure of information in respect of specific assessees is prohibited except as per the provisions of section 138 of the Act, said the reply.

Advertisement

Advertisement