Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (7) TMI 1403 - BOMBAY HIGH COURTReopening of assessment u/s 147 - income chargeable to tax in India or not? - as argued purchased since Petitioner has only purchased equity shares in the subsidiary and there has been no sale of shares and the subsidiary having not declared or paid any dividend and also Petitioner has not earned any India-sourced income during the year under consideration - HELD THAT:- Respondent No.1 has not applied mind to the matter at hand. Respondent No.1 has not considered the fact that Petitioner has the necessary permission from the Reserve Bank of India and if the Reserve Bank of India had any doubts about Petitioner’s genuineness or the source of funds, Reserve Bank of India would have red flagged Petitioner or the subsidiary. As stated in the Petition that at no stage Respondent No.1 even called upon Petitioner to explain the source of fund and has straight away passed the order impugned, saying that Petitioner has not submitted any documentary evidence to verify the source of investment. Respondent No.1 has failed to appreciate Petitioner is a company organized under the relevant laws of USA and is subject to tax in USA, with income running into billions of dollars. Petitioner has been filing its financial results with the Federal Reserve as per Bank Holding Company Act which is in public domain and indicates Petitioner had sufficient funds to make the investments in the subsidiary during the year in consideration. We hereby quash and set aside the order passed u/s 148A(d). We remit the matter back to Respondent No.1 but the officer who shall consider the matter will be someone different from said Ms. Monica Pande who has passed the impugned order. Respondent No.2 may assign the matter to any other officer as he/she deems fit. The consequential notice issued under Section 148 is also hereby quashed and set aside.
|