9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (4) TMI 274X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ACRYLIC MANUFACTURING COMPANY Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX IV and ANOTHER [2008 (11) TMI 2 - DELHI HIGH COURT] followed – the reopening of assessment beyond four years was barred by limitation in view of the proviso to Section 147 – thus, notice issued u/s 148 is quashed and the assessment order is also set aside – Decided in favour of Assessee. - ITA No.6264/Del/2012 - - - Dated:- 4-4-2014 - Shri G. D. Agrawal And Shri A. D. Jain,JJ. For the Appellant : Shri Salil Kapoor and Shri Vikas Jain, Advocates. For the Respondent : Shri Sanjeev Sharma, CIT-DR. ORDER Per G. D. Agrawal, VP : This appeal by the assessee is directed against the directions of learned Dispute Resolution Panel-I, New Delhi dated 26th Sep ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . He submitted that on these facts, the decision of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Haryana Acrylic Manufacturing Co. Vs. CIT [2009] 308 ITR 38 (Delhi) would be squarely applicable. In the said case, Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court quashed the reopening of assessment because in the reasons supplied to the petitioner, there was no whisper that the petitioner had failed to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment. He stated that the facts of the assessee s case are identical and, therefore, the above decision of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court would be squarely applicable. 5. Learned DR, apart from relying upon the order of the Assessing Officer as well as learned CIT(A), state ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ourt. He, therefore, submitted that in this case, there is no escapement of income at all, so, there is no question of chargeability of tax at a low rate. However, he stated that as per proviso, the department will get the jurisdiction to reopen only when there is escapement of income on account of failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts. 7. We have carefully considered the submissions of both the sides and perused relevant material placed before us. Proviso to Section 147 reads as under:- Provided that where an assessment under sub-section (3) of section 143 or this section has been made for the relevant assessment year, no action shall be taken under this section after the expiry of four ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ose fully and truly all material facts necessary for his assessment. Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court considered this issue in the case of Haryana Acrylic Manufacturing Co. (supra) and held as under:- allowing the petition, (i) that the reasons recorded did not indicate the failure on the part of the petitioner to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for its assessment for the assessment year 1998-99. While in the reasons supplied to the petition there was no mention of the allegation that there was a failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts, in the reasons shown in the said form to the counter-affidavit there was a specific allegation that there was a failure on the part o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 10% plus surcharge. 10. From the above, it is evident that in the reasons recorded, the Assessing Officer has referred to the completion of original assessment under Section 143(3) and has pointed out that the tax had been levied at a rate of 10% while it should have been levied at the rate of 20% on some income and 40% on some income. Thus, in the reasons recorded, there is no mention by the Assessing Officer of any failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for his assessment. Therefore, on the above facts, the decision of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Haryana Acrylic Manufacturing Co. (supra) would be squarely applicable. Respectfully following the same, we hold ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
