TMI Blog2012 (8) TMI 540X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... H. B., JJ. JUDGMENT H. B. Antani J.- By way of filing the present petition under article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the notice dated April 11, 2001, issued by the respondent seeking to reopen the petitioner's assessment for the assessment year 2000-01 as illegal and contrary to the provisions of the law and without jurisdiction. The petitioner, a registered firm, filed its return of income for the assessment year 2000-01, on August 1, 2000, declaring total income of Rs. 11,143 which was accepted by the respondent on February 19, 2001, vide intimation issued under section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). The petitioner received the impugned notic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Junagadh. The Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax referred the case to the Departmental Valuation Officer for determining the correct cost of constructions. The Departmental Valuation Officer, Ahmedabad, vide his letter No. 2(2)/DVO/99-00/ 1043, dated February 1, 2000, determined the cost of construction for the assessment year 1998-99 at Rs. 49,05,785 and for the assessment year 1999-2000 at Rs. 34,89,830 against the cost of construction declared by the assessee firm for Rs. 21,42,131 and Rs. 17,23,380 respectively. Thus, the difference in valuation requires to be added back to the total income treating the same as unexplained expenses/ investment. The return of income so filed has been processed under section 143(1)(a) which requires to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... August 1, 2000, and declared the total income at Rs. 11,143. The petitioner-assessee during the previous year was engaged in the construction business and constructed business complex during three financial years, i.e., 1997-98 to 1999-2000 and had filed the returns for its income for the assessment year 1998-99, being the first return with the Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Junagadh. The Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Junagadh, referred the case to the Departmental Valuation Officer, for determining the correct cost of construction. The Valuation Officer, Ahmedabad, vide his report, determined the cost of construction for the assessment year 1998-99 at Rs. 49,05,785 and for the assessment year 1999-2000 at Rs. 34,89,830 again ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ficer has to apply his mind to the information, if any, collected and must form a belief thereon. In the circumstances, there is no merit in the civil appeal. The Department was not entitled to reopen the assessment. Civil appeal is, accordingly, dismissed. No order as to costs." In view of the aforesaid proposition of law, the impugned notice under section 148 of the Income-tax Act is unsustainable and, therefore, the petition is allowed. The impugned notice dated April 11, 2001, issued by the Income-tax Officer, Ward No. 2, Junagadh (annexure A to the petition) for reopening the assessment for the assessment year 2000-01 under section 148 of the Income-tax Act is quashed and set aside. Rule is made absolute accordingly with no ord ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|