9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
The validity of notice issued u/s 148 of the IT Act, 1961 for reassessment of income for the asst. yr. 1967-68. Communication by ITO regarding reasons for initiation of reassessment proceedings. Validity of Notice u/s 148: The petitioner challenged the notice issued u/s 148 proposing reassessment, citing that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment. The ITO formed reasons to believe that Rs.1,200 chargeable to tax had escaped assessment due to the omission of disclosing material facts. The statement of Sh. Des Raj Sharma, denying receipt of interest, was considered fresh material for reopening the assessment. The court held that the reasons constituted valid material justifying the belief of escaped assessment, thus upholding the validity of the notice u/s 148. Communication of Reasons by ITO: The ITO, relying on a Supreme Court decision, initially conveyed that reasons for reassessment were not required to be communicated. However, upon show-cause notice, the reasons and Sh. Des Raj Sharma's statement were placed on record. The petitioner disputed Sharma's statement, claiming it as inadmissible evidence. The court noted that the statement provided relevant material for the belief of escaped assessment, rendering the communication issue moot. The challenge to the notice was assessed based on the available material, emphasizing the relevance of the information for forming the belief. Precedents and Conclusion: Citing legal precedents, the court highlighted the importance of relevant material for forming the belief of escaped assessment during reassessment proceedings. The Division Bench's decision emphasized the significance of material relevance over the absolute truth at the initial stage of reassessment notices. In this case, Sh. Des Raj Sharma's statement denying receipt of interest provided crucial material for the reassessment. The court dismissed the writ petition, allowing the enforcement of any demand as per law due to the cessation of the stay order.
|
