9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved:
The issue involves the justification of reopening the assessment under section 147(a) based on the findings of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) regarding interest accrued to the assessee from advances made to a company. Judgment Details: The Income-tax Officer initially included interest accrued on advances to a company in the assessee's income, leading to disputes. Subsequently, during a search at the assessee's branch office, a paper noting interest due from the company was found. The assessments were reopened under section 147(a) due to the assessee's failure to disclose this information fully. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) accepted the assessee's argument that there was no direct link between the seized paper and the interest earned. The reassessment was canceled based on this. The Revenue challenged this decision, claiming that the seized paper indicated interest earned by the assessee. They argued that under section 132(4A) of the Income-tax Act, a presumption could be made that the contents of such documents are true. However, the assessee's counsel cited a previous case where it was established that such presumptions are rebuttable and subject to factual analysis. The High Court considered the legal provisions and the facts of the case. They noted that under section 132(4A), a presumption must be drawn that seized documents belong to the assessee and are true. The Tribunal's analysis of the seized documents, the company's accounts, and the lack of interest credited to the assessee supported the conclusion that the reopening of assessment was not justified. The Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, emphasizing that the presumption of the seized documents belonging to the assessee was rebutted by factual findings. In conclusion, the High Court ruled in favor of the assessee, stating that the reopening of the assessment under section 147(a) was not justified. No costs were awarded in this matter.
|
