Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2022 (5) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (5) TMI 1387 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURTReopening of assessment u/s 147 - deduction of TDS on expenses on behalf of the Principal Companies - valid approval u/s 151 - TDS @ 2% u/s 194C or @ 10% u/s 194H - petitioner had received payments under Section 194 J also, but it had not shown the said receipts in his P&L account and had not given any explanation for the same - HELD THAT:- In the present case, at the time of making the assessment originally, the Assessing Officer had not formed any opinion regarding the reasons on which the notice under Section 148 of the Act has been issued. To say it more particularly, the A.O. had not formed any opinion regarding receipt of payments by the petitioner under Section 194 J, which had not been shown in its P&L account, non-disclosure of the amount of reimbursement of expenses claimed by it, non-submission of the details of expenses incurred by it for verification during the assessment proceedings and non-production of any ledgers, bills and vouchers of expenses incurred on behalf of the Principal Companies etc. Therefore, it is not a case of “change of opinion” and challenge to the notice under Section 148 of the Act on the ground that it seeks to initiate reassessment on the ground of change of opinion, cannot be accepted. The approving authority – the PCIT, has stated that he agrees with the comments of the A.O., which were annexed with the order, and has recorded his satisfaction that it was a fit case for issuance of the notice under Section 148 of the Act. The aforesaid order does not indicate non-application of mind by the PCIT to the proposal made by the A.O. and we are not able to accept the submission that the PCIT has granted approval without application of mind to the proposal put up by the A.O. Keeping in view the scope of power of judicial review while scrutinizing a notice issued under Section 148 of the Act as explained in Raymond woolen Mills Ltd. [1997 (12) TMI 12 - SUPREME COURT] and Phool Chand Bajarang Lal [1993 (7) TMI 1 - SUPREME COURT] and Srikrishna [1996 (7) TMI 2 - SUPREME COURT], we do not have to give a final decision as to whether there is suppression of material facts by the assessee or not as the sufficiency or correctness of the material cannot a thing to be considered at this stage. In the instant case, the notice under Section 148 of the Act has been issued by the assessing officer after conducting an investigation and going through the income tax return and other related documents of the petitioner and after forming reason to believe that the petitioner did not truly and fully disclose all the material facts, because of which income has escaped assessment. We are satisfied that there was prima facie material available on record before the assessing officer for issuing a notice for reassessment and the notice under Section 148. WP dismissed.
|