9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Reopening of assessment under section 147(b) based on information from Commissioner's order. Validity of considering Commissioner's order as information for reopening assessment. Interpretation of Supreme Court decisions on the concept of "information" for reassessment under section 147(b). Impact of the Commissioner's order on the concluded assessment sought to be reopened. Entitlement of assessing authority to be enlightened by any source considered as information for reopening assessment. Analysis: The High Court of Karnataka addressed a reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, concerning the reopening of assessments for the years 1978-79 and 1979-80 based on the Commissioner of Income-tax's order. The crux of the issue was whether the order constituted valid "information" for initiating reassessment under section 147(b) of the Act. The Commissioner's observations during proceedings for the year 1980-81 led the assessing authority to reopen the assessments, claiming the Commissioner's order as the source of information. The appellate authority and the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal rejected this argument, stating that the Commissioner's order did not constitute valid information for reassessment. The Revenue challenged this decision, leading to the reference before the High Court. The High Court emphasized the concept of "information" as interpreted by the Supreme Court in various judgments. Referring to the decision in A. L. A. Firm v. CIT, the Court highlighted four propositions determining the validity of reopening assessments based on new information. The Court clarified that information could arise from various sources, including judicial decisions and overlooked aspects during the original assessment. The Court underscored that the assessing authority could rely on the Commissioner's order as a source of information for reopening assessments, even if the information was available during the original assessment. The Court cited the necessity of any material that came to the notice of the assessing authority post the original assessment, empowering them to initiate reassessment proceedings. Moreover, the Court addressed the argument that the Commissioner's order did not impact the concluded assessment sought to be reopened. By analyzing the details considered by the Commissioner and their relevance to the deductions claimed by the assessee, the Court concluded that the Commissioner's order had a direct bearing on the assessment in question. Ultimately, the High Court ruled in favor of the Revenue, emphasizing that the assessing authority was entitled to be enlightened by any source considered as information for reopening assessments. The Court remitted the case to the first appellate authority for further examination of the merits of the deductions claimed by the assessee for the respective years involved in the references.
|
