9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved:
The judgment deals with notices issued u/s 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 1983-84, alleging that income had escaped assessment. The main issue is whether the assessee had fully disclosed all material facts necessary during the original assessments. Assessment Year 1983-84: The notices were issued beyond four years from the end of the relevant assessment years. The Deputy Commissioner stated that material evidence for deduction under section 80-I was not produced or examined during the assessment year 1989-90. The assessee claimed deduction under section 80-I from 1983-84, with details of establishment, production, and machinery installation provided. Disclosure of Material Facts: The assessee argued that it had made a full and true disclosure of all relevant material facts during the assessments. The counsel emphasized the requirements of sections 147 and 159 of the Act, stating that the notices were issued long after the four-year period, without satisfying the conditions set out in the proviso to section 147. Legal Interpretation: The court analyzed the provisions of sections 147, 148, and 149 of the Act. It clarified that the time limit in section 149 is not a substitute for the requirements of section 147. Both sections must be complied with simultaneously for a valid notice under section 148. The court emphasized that failure to disclose all material facts necessary for assessment could sustain the notices issued after the four-year period. Precedents and Case Law: Referring to the case of ITO v. Lakhmani Mewal Das, the court highlighted the duty of the assessee to make a true and full disclosure of primary facts during the original assessment. The court noted that the mere production of account books or evidence does not fulfill the disclosure requirement. The judgment also cited the case of A. L. A. Firm v. CIT, outlining the circumstances in which assessments can be reopened. Conclusion: Based on the legal principles established in previous cases, the court concluded that the notices issued to the assessee were valid. The information contained in the assessment order for the year 1989-90, which was not provided by the assessee during the original assessments, formed the basis for reopening the assessments. The writ petitions were dismissed, allowing the assessee to challenge the contents of the assessment order for the year 1989-90 before the Assessing Officer.
|
