9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Jurisdiction of notices u/s 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for assessment years 1978-79 to 1981-82 challenged in a writ application u/r 226 of the Constitution.
Summary: The appellant challenged notices u/s 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, issued for assessment years 1978-79 to 1981-82. The High Court considered whether the notices were without jurisdiction. The reassessments were completed, but before serving demand notices and assessment orders, the appellant moved a writ application. The court examined the reasons for reopening the assessments u/s 147(b) and found the Income-tax Officer's actions to be based on a change of opinion rather than new information. The court ruled that the notices were without jurisdiction and quashed them, along with the assessment orders and demand notices. The court also noted that the assessments were made under section 143(3) and that there were substantial losses carried forward from earlier years, resulting in no loss of revenue even with the added income from reassessment. The appeal succeeded, and costs were not awarded. The Income-tax Officer invoked jurisdiction u/s 147(b) based on information indicating income had escaped assessment. However, the court found that the Officer's actions were not justified as they were not based on new information but on a change of opinion. The court clarified the distinction between sections 147(a) and 147(b) and emphasized that the Officer must have post-assessment information to proceed u/s 147(b). The court also highlighted that section 292B does not empower the Officer to convert proceedings from one section to another without fulfilling the necessary conditions. The court concluded that the impugned notices lacked jurisdiction and were set aside. The court examined the original assessment order and the reassessment order, noting discrepancies in the reasons provided for reopening the assessments. It was observed that the Officer attempted to justify the reopening under a different section than initially invoked. The court emphasized that the Officer's actions must align with the specific provisions of the Income-tax Act and that jurisdiction cannot be assumed without fulfilling the required conditions. The court ultimately found the notices to be without jurisdiction and quashed them, along with related assessment orders and demand notices. The Tribunal's order for a previous assessment year was reviewed, but it did not provide sufficient justification for the reassessment in question. The court determined that the proceedings were not initiated based on findings from the Tribunal's order. Considering the facts and circumstances, the court concluded that the impugned notices lacked jurisdiction and were therefore set aside and quashed. The appeal was successful, and costs were not awarded.
|
