9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (10) TMI 2X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er on the said aspect, necessary and consequential assessment order will follow. Only in case the petitioner is not able to satisfy the Assessing Officer on the said aspect, the Assessing Officer can proceed with the reassessment in accordance with law. We clarify that only one assessment order can be and will be passed and the petitioner cannot insist that a separate order be passed. - Decided partly in favor of assessee. - Writ Petition (Civil) No. 2770/2012 - - - Dated:- 31-7-2013 - Sanjiv Khanna And Sanjeev Sachdeva,JJ. For the Petitioner : Mr. Prakash Kumar, Advocate. For the Respondent : Ms. Suruchi Aggarwal, Sr. Standing Counsel. ORDER Sanjiv Khanna, J. (Oral):- This writ petition impugns reassessment proceedin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Act, 1961. Notice u/s 143(2) was issued on 02.07.2008 and assessment was completed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144C of the I.T. Act, 1961 on 30.08.2010 at an income of Rs.38,94,75,850/- thereby making addition of Rs.23,94,76,875/-. However, the assessee has not disclosed the amount received from M/s Cannon Inc. Japan in its return of income. In view of the above facts, I have reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment owing to the failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts relevant for the assessment. Issue notice u/s 148 of the I.T. Act, 1961 for the A.Y. 2006-07. 4. Subsequent to the recording of the reasons dated 24th March, 2011, the petitioner wrote letter dated 28th March, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o produce books of accounts and other documents relating to all payments received from Japan of Rs.1 crore or more for the Financial Years 2004-05 and 2005-06 as per the chart enclosed as Annexure-A. Details were submitted by the petitioner vide letter dated 16th February, 2011. In reply, the petitioner had stated that amount of payments received mentioned in Annexure-A to the notice matched the company‟s record and there was no difference in the first and second item of the annexure. Regarding the third item pertaining to the year 2005, accounts were checked and the petitioner was unable to trace receipt of Japanese Yen 8,99,92,707. They would further check their records and had requested the authority to provide more details/informa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Investigation Wing at Gurgaon. The said assertion has not been tested or examined. The veracity of the same, therefore, is uncertain and requires scrutiny. To some extent, the petitioner themselves are to be blamed because they did not furnish and give the information on or before reasons to believe were recorded by the Assessing Officer and reassessment notice was issued on 24th March, 2011. They kept quiet and remained silent after writing letter dated 16th February, 2011. 9. The petitioner asserts that it is factually correct and true that receipt of Japanese Yen 8,99,92,707 was included and was brought to tax in the Assessment Year 2005-06. It is not possible for the Court to determine and decide the said contention. It is a quest ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the said fact by legal evidence or reached a firm conclusion, as this is determined and decided in the assessment order, which is the final stage before the Assessing Officer. As we are dealing with initiation of proceedings, it is not necessary that the material should conclusively prove escapement. 10. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there have been cases where reassessment notices have been quashed pursuant to authoritative pronouncement on the question of law or because of decisions of higher authorities in the case of the assessee themselves relating to different years. This is correct but in such cases reassessment proceedings are quashed for the reason that it would be futile to allow reassessment proceedings to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... esent case. 11. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts and balancing out equities, we feel it will be just and proper to direct that the petitioner should furnish complete and full details before the Assessing Officer in the reassessment proceedings in regard to receipt of Japanese Yen 8,99,92,707 in India and the fact that the said amount was shown in the taxable income and received in the previous year. In case the petitioner is able to satisfy the Assessing Officer on the said aspect, necessary and consequential assessment order will follow. Only in case the petitioner is not able to satisfy the Assessing Officer on the said aspect, the Assessing Officer can proceed with the reassessment in accordance with law. We clarify that only one as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
