Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2013 (10) TMI 1227

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... case of the Assessing Officer that any material had come to its possession or knowledge post the assessment under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act. The factual material was already before the Assessing Officer and had been fully and truly disclosed by the petitioner. The Revenue thus had to satisfy the additional requirement as mentioned in condition No. (v) as laid down by the judgment in Usha International case [2012 (9) TMI 767 - DELHI HIGH COURT] i.e. there was failure or omission on the part of the Assessee to disclose full and true material facts – In the present case, there is no such failure of disclosure – Decided in favor of Assessee. - W. P. (C) No. 2230/2012 - - - Dated:- 23-8-2013 - Sanjiv Khanna And Sanjeev Sachdeva,J .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tion 143(3) of the Act on 31.12.2003. 4. On 18.12.2006, the petitioner was served with a notice under Section 148 of the Act for reopening of the assessment on the ground of escapement of income. In response to the said notice, the petitioner on 22.01.2007 filed the same return as had been originally filed under Section 139(1) of the Act under protest and further requested the respondents to furnish the reasons recorded for reopening of assessment under Section 147/148 of the Income Tax Act. 5. On 05.02.2007, the reasons were furnished by the respondent. The reason for reopening of the assessment as communicated to the petitioner is as under:- It has come to my notice that the Assessee has paid managerial remuneration which are in ex .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the relevant year. 9. By the impugned order dated 15.03.2012, the respondent dealt with the objection raised by the petitioner qua initiation and rejected the same. With regard to the issue of change of opinion and the fact that true and complete disclosure had been made by the petitioner, the finding recorded in the impugned order is as under:- 4.2 Coming to the second objection regarding the proceedings being based on mere change of opinion, the law on this count is also equally settled that mere change of opinion will not confer jurisdiction on the Assessing Officer. Now the question arises what constitutes a change of opinion. The very expression Change of opinion‟ suggests that an opinion of sort must have been formed by .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... f Section 43A of the Companies Act, 1956, w.e.f. April 1,2000. However, the remuneration to managing director with effect from that date is subject to approval from the Department of Company affairs. The same was rejected by the Department of Company Affairs. The Company is in process of filing the application again for approval to the Department. 12. The law in respect of reopening of the assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act is no longer res integra and has been the subject matter of various judicial pronouncements. In the recent decision of the Full Bench of this High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax-VI, New Delhi vs. Usha International Limited (2012) 348 ITR 485 (Del) FB, one of us (Sanjiv Khanna, J) speaking for the majority .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... is to establish that there was no full and true disclosure by the Assessee of all material facts. 14. The reason for reopening of the assessment of the petitioner given is that managerial remuneration in excess of the prescribed limit was paid and the same was not approved by the Union Government of India. Notes to the Accounts for the relevant year, as mentioned in the return, clearly record and affirm that the petitioner had disclosed the amount of remuneration paid to the Managing Director and also the fact the same was subject to approval of the Department of the Company Affairs and even rejected by the Department of Company Affairs and that the Assessee company was in the process of filing an application again for approval of the De .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates