9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (5) TMI 370X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... For Appellant: Mr. Ajay Vohra, Ms. Kavita Jha and Mr. Somnath Shukla, Advs. For Respondent: Mr. Kamal Sawhney, Sr. Standing Counsel. SANJIV KHANNA, J: (ORAL) Munjal Showa Ltd. has filed the present writ petition for quashing the notice dated 24.3.2011 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( Act‟, for short) for the assessment year 2005-06. 2. It is an accepted case that the original assessment proceedings pursuant to return of income filed on 29.10.2005 were completed by an order under Section 143(3) of the Act dated 31.12.2008. The assessee had declared income of Rs.10,83,61,920/- which was enhanced to Rs.33,49,73,994/- by order dated 31.12.2008. We are not concerned with the said addition, which is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s not a revenue expenditure. Thus there is failure on the part of the assessee to fully and truly disclose true particulars of its income and the same is required to be reassessed and taxed which requires reopening of assessment by initiation of proceedings u/s 147 by issue of notice u/s 148. Therefore, notice u/s 148 is hereby issued. The notice is issued after obtaining approval from CIT-II, New Delhi vide her Letter no.F.No.CIT-II/Delhi/Notice 148/2010/3331 dated 18/03/2011. Sd/- (A.S. Nehra) Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 5(1), New Delhi 4. It is the accepted position that the re-assessment notice was issued after 4 years from the end of the assessment year. Therefore, two conditions are required for valid initiation of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessment proceedings. In the counter affidavit it is stated that the Assessing Officer had not given any positive or negative finding in the assessment order in this regard and therefore it is not a case of change of opinion. If an issue/aspect is raised by the Assessing Officer and the assessee furnishes reply, but no addition is made in the assessment order, the sequitor is that the Assessing Officer was satisfied with the reply and the stand of the assessee. In Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Eicher Ltd. (2007) 294 ITR 310, it has been held: - 15. In Hari Iron Trading Co. v. CIT [2003] 263 ITR 437, a Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court observed that an assessee has no control over the way an assessment order is draft ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
