9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (12) TMI 612 - HC - Income TaxValidity of reassessment u/s 147 - Held that - The provisions of section 142A of the Act was inserted by Finance (No. 2) Act, 2004 with effect from 14th November, 1972 - The original assessment order passed on 14.1.1991 that is much before 28.11.2003 - It had become final between the parties on the date when section 142A was inserted by Finance (No. 2) Act, 2004 - Following CIT vs. Gulam Mohammad 2009 (8) TMI 635 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT - The proviso to section 142A states that the provisions shall not apply where the assessment has become final before the applicability of this section - Decided against Revenue.
Issues:
1. Appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the judgment and order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal for the assessment year 1995-96. 2. Whether the A.O. conducted an independent enquiry regarding the investment made by the assessee in the property before making the addition. 3. Whether the inquiry conducted by the Departmental valuation officer can be considered as an inquiry conducted by the A.O. under Section 131(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 4. Whether the report of the departmental valuation officer determining the cost of construction could be used by the A.O. for making an addition. 5. Whether the Tribunal order is valid in light of the new provisions of Section 142-A introduced retrospectively in the Income Tax Act. Analysis: 1. The appeal was filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal's judgment for the assessment year 1995-96. The substantial questions of law raised included whether the A.O. conducted an independent enquiry regarding the investment made by the assessee in the property before making the addition. The Tribunal's decision was challenged on the grounds of lack of independent inquiry by the A.O. 2. Another issue raised was whether the inquiry conducted by the Departmental valuation officer could be considered as an inquiry conducted by the A.O. under Section 131(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal's decision was questioned on the basis of the nature of the inquiry conducted and its relevance to the A.O.'s decision-making process. 3. The Tribunal's decision was also challenged regarding the usability of the report of the departmental valuation officer in determining the cost of construction for making an addition. The validity and admissibility of such a report by the A.O. were key points of contention in this issue. 4. Furthermore, the Tribunal's order was questioned in light of the new provisions of Section 142-A introduced retrospectively in the Income Tax Act. The issue revolved around whether the Tribunal's decision was legally sound considering the implications of the new provisions introduced by the Finance Act 2004. 5. The court referred to a similar case to support its decision, emphasizing the importance of Section 142-A of the Income Tax Act. The court concluded that the reassessment proceedings were not justified under the proviso of Section 142-A, leading to the dismissal of the appeal filed by the department. The judgment favored the assessee, highlighting the importance of legal provisions and precedents in tax matters.
|
