9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (4) TMI 424X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essment proceedings could not be initiated. The judgment of Tube Company Ltd. Versus Income Tax Officer, [2004 (6) TMI 18 - CALCUTTA High Court] has no application to the facts of the present case in as much as when the impugned notices under section 148 were issued, no proceedings for reassessment was pending. The earlier reassessment proceedings were dropped by the order dated 22.6.2005 and the earlier notice issued under section 148 on 11.3.2004 was cancelled.Writ dismissed. - Writ Tax No. - 1311 of 2005, Writ Tax No. - 1312 of 2005 - - - Dated:- 17-4-2013 - Prakash Krishna And Ram Surat Ram (Maurya),JJ. For the Petitioner : Rakesh Ranjan Agrawal,Suyash Agrawal For the Respondent : Bharatji Agarwal,R.K. Upadhaya ORDER ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed. Heard Sri Rakesh Ranjan Agrawal and Sri Suyash Agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri R.K. Upadhyay, learned counsel for the respondents. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that initiation of reassessment proceedings for the second time is not valid for the reason that earlier, similar exercise was taken by the department and the department dropped the proceedings and the present proceedings have been set to motion on identical reasons to believe that the income of the petitioner has escaped the assessment. Reliance has been placed on a judgment of Indian Tube Company Ltd. Versus Income Tax Officer, (2005), 272 ITR 439. In reply, the learned counsel for the department submitted that the reasons recorded f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for both the assessment years which is within a period of six years from the year 1999. The twin conditions that the escapement assessment is more than Rs. One Lakh and that a notice can be issued within a period of six years from the end of the assessment year, are complied with. It cannot be said that the proceedings are barred by time. During the course of argument, it was accepted by the learned counsel for the parties that the assessments were completed under section 143(1) of the Act. Reliance placed by the learned counsel for the petitioner on Indian Tube Company Limited (supra) is misplaced one and it is distinguishable on facts. In response to the reassessment notice, the petitioner had filed returns and proceedings were pendi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
