9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Validity of reassessment under section 147(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 2. Justification of the Appellate Tribunal's decision not to proceed to enter into the merits of the reassessment. Analysis: The case involved a reassessment under section 147(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 1968-69. The original assessment was reopened based on information from an audit report indicating excessive relief granted to the assessee, underassessment of income, and incorrect computation of disallowances. The Income-tax Officer passed a reassessment order adding various amounts. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner upheld some additions but deleted others, directing a rework on one disallowance. The Income-tax Officer sought further enhancement, which the Appellate Assistant Commissioner granted. The Tribunal, after considering the audit report and legal precedents, held the reassessment invalid as it was not based on a legal question. The Tribunal set aside the reassessment and restored the original assessment, declining to address the merits of the case. The Department argued that the audit report merely pointed out factual omissions by the Income-tax Officer, not legal issues. However, the Tribunal and the High Court found that the audit report did indeed highlight legal aspects to be considered in the reassessment. The High Court noted that if the audit report points out legal positions, it does not constitute valid information for reassessment under section 147(b) of the Act. Citing the Supreme Court decision in Indian and Eastern Newspaper Society v. CIT [1979] 119 ITR 996, the High Court emphasized the distinction between pointing out facts and pointing out the law for reassessment purposes. The High Court held that the Tribunal was correct in setting aside the reassessment and restoring the original assessment, in line with the legal principles established by the Supreme Court. In conclusion, the High Court answered the questions referred in the affirmative and against the Department, emphasizing that the Tribunal's decision to set aside the reassessment and not address the merits was in accordance with the law. The High Court also highlighted that the decision in R. K. Malhotra, ITO v. Kasturbhai Lalbhai [1977] 109 ITR 537 was no longer valid law in light of the Supreme Court ruling in Indian and Eastern Newspaper Society v. CIT [1979] 119 ITR 996. No costs were awarded in the matter.
|
