9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Reopening of assessment under section 147(b) of the Income-tax Act. 2. Jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer to issue notice under section 148. 3. Disallowance of certain deductions and tax credits. 4. Right of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to dismiss the Department's appeal as infructuous. 5. Interpretation of the term "information" under section 147(b) of the Income-tax Act. Analysis: 1. The case involved the reopening of the assessment under section 147(b) of the Income-tax Act for the assessment year 1976-77. The Assessing Officer initiated proceedings to reopen the assessment based on the belief that he had wrongly applied a circular related to bad debts to interest accrued on sticky loans, leading to the omission of taxable income. The assessee contested the reopening, arguing that it was illegal as the Assessing Officer lacked new information to justify it. 2. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) upheld the reopening of the assessment but granted relief to the assessee on certain deductions while disallowing tax credits claimed. Both the assessee and the Commissioner of Income-tax appealed to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, which allowed the assessee's appeal, annulling the assessment due to lack of subsequent information justifying the reopening. 3. The Tribunal dismissed the Department's appeal as infructuous since the assessment was annulled. The Commissioner of Income-tax sought to refer questions of law to the High Court regarding the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer to issue the notice under section 148 and the Tribunal's dismissal of the Department's appeal. 4. The Commissioner relied on a Supreme Court decision to argue that the Assessing Officer had jurisdiction to reopen the assessment based on the mistake made during the original assessment. However, the Tribunal rejected the application to refer questions of law, stating that no referable question arose from its appellate order. 5. The court cited a larger Bench Supreme Court decision to clarify that an error discovered on reconsideration of the same material from the original assessment does not give the Assessing Officer the power to reopen the assessment. In this case, the Assessing Officer's realization of the mistake regarding the tax treatment of interest on sticky loans did not constitute new "information" justifying the reopening. In conclusion, the court dismissed the applications under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act as no questions of law arose from the Tribunal's decision, and the Assessing Officer lacked jurisdiction to reopen the assessment based on a mistake from the original assessment.
|
