9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Petition for quashing notice u/s 148 of Income-tax Act for assessment year 1988-89 and letter requiring attendance u/s 143(2) of the Act.
Summary: The petitioner filed a return for the assessment year 1988-89, which was accepted by the Income-tax Officer under section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act. Subsequently, the Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax issued a notice u/s 148 for recomputation of income based on information alleging receipt of money from a hawala scam. The petitioner requested documents related to the assessment year, which were not readily available. The petitioner's advocate argued that the notice should be quashed due to lack of evidence and non-existence of the reason for issuance. However, the court found the petition premature as the petitioner had not filed a return in response to the notice, and no prejudicial order had been passed against him. The court further noted that the Special Judge's decision not to frame charges against the petitioner in a criminal case did not affect the tax liability under the Income-tax Act. The court emphasized that the Income-tax Officer had jurisdiction to determine tax liability independently of criminal proceedings. Referring to legal precedents, the court highlighted that the sufficiency of reasons for reopening an assessment is not for the court to judge, and the assessing authority can proceed based on fresh information indicating possible tax evasion. In conclusion, the court dismissed the writ petition, allowing the petitioner to file a return in response to the notice and raise objections against the proceedings under section 148 of the Income-tax Act. The court clarified that its observations in the order would not adversely affect the petitioner's case, emphasizing the limited scope for intervention in such matters.
|
