9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (2) TMI 458X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l 1, 1994 to March 31, 1995) is legal or not?. 3. It is not in dispute that the assessment for the year in question was completed on June 30, 1998 (annexure P 7) and later after remand by the Appellate court, it was completed on June 27, 2001 (annexure P 14). The reason for reopening of the assessment was also conveyed to petitioner alongwith the impugned notice. It is worth to quote in verbatim in Hindi: 4. In my opinion, aforesaid reasons are not only material and decisive but fully empowers the assessing authority to reopen the assessment. Indeed, it is a case where the petitioner filed certain documents (builty, invoices etc.) of transport companies in assessment proceeding in support of their case asserting those documents to be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... can never be allowed to sustain. It has to go. 6.. The assessing officer has given full and complete details of an inquiry conducted in relation to such documents. They are quoted in the reasons. They are equally communicated to the petitioner. It, thus, satisfies the requirement of statute dealing with the cases of reassessment. It is now for the assessing officer, to make reassessment after granting adequate opportunity to the petitioner. 7.. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner was that no notice under the repealed Act could be issued. I do not agree. It is a submission more in the nature of technical than that of substance. It cannot be disputed that the assessing officer has the power to reopen the assessment on the g ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e the issue, such is the case here. 9.. Yet another submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that order of the assessing officer having been merged in appellate court, the assessing officer had no right to issue impugned notice, has no merit. Firstly, the submission is factually incorrect, because, the appellate court in this case had set aside the assessment and remanded the case. It is then the fresh assessment order was passed. The question of merger did not arise. 10.. In substance, therefore, the impugned notices are held to be legally and properly issued to the petitioner. They are based on cogent material and need to be probed further. The assessing officer should proceed to give effect to by making reassessment for the y ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
