P.C.JAIN, J. - (1.) THE petitioner has filed this application under s. 482 CrPC seeking extension in the time -limit for completing the block assessment of the non -petitioner No. 2 in compliance with the order passed by this Court on 16th May, 1997 in SB Crl. Misc. Petn. No. 337/96.
(2.) THE relevant facts necessary for the disposal of this application, are all stated in the order dt. 16th May, 1997. The following order was passed on 16th May, 1997 in the above miscellaneous petition : 'In this view of the matter, I allow this petition in part. The impugned order dt. 30th April, 1996, passed by the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate (Railways), Jodhpur is modified to this extent that a sum of Rs. 3,34,000 be refunded to the respondent No. 2 on the conditions specified in the said order and the remaining amount be handed over to the petitioner - Department provided it submits an undertaking that the assessment of the amount in question shall be completed within a period of three months from today and after assessment, if any sum deserves to be refunded to the respondent No. 2, the same shall be refunded to him without any delay'. In the petition it is stated by the petitioner that after a lot of persuation, Babu Bhai, non -petitioner, filed return of income under protest for the block 1988 -89 to 1998 -99 on 14th July, 1997. The assessee declared nil undisclosed income in respect of the above block years. The Department, therefore, requires more time for making deep inquiries and investigation because the assessee, non -petitioner, has retracted from its earlier admission of having been found in possession of unexplained money of Rs. 8.35 lacs. Thereafter the Department vigorously pursued the matter. The details of the proceedings taken by the Department in this respect have been furnished on a sheet of paper which has been placed on the record of this file. It was, therefore, prayed that the time allotted to the IT Department for completing the above assessment is not sufficient in the facts and circumstances of the case. The petitioner has, therefore, prayed that the Department may either be allowed to complete the assessment within the time -limit as provided in s. 158BE of the IT Act or a further extension of six months may be granted.
(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the non -petitioner No. 2.;