9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (7) TMI 689X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the same deserves to be quashed and set aside – Decided in favour of Assessee. - Special Civil Application No. 8754 of 2014, Special Civil Application No. 8755 of 2014, Special Civil Application No. 8757 of 2014 - - - Dated:- 8-7-2014 - M. R. Shah And K. J. Thaker,JJ. For the Petitioner : Mr. R. K. Patel For the Respondent : Mrs. Mauna M. Bhatt JUDGMENT (Per : Honourable Mr. Justice M. R. Shah) 1. RULE. Ms. Mauna Bhatt, learned advocate waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondents in each of the petitions. 2. In the facts and circumstances of the case and with the consent of the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties, the present petitions are taken up for final heari ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s 147 and 148 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') with respect to different Assessment Years on the very ground, the facts with respect to the Assessment Year 2007-08 in Special Civil Application No.8754/2014 are considered. 4.1. The assessee, who was engaged in the construction business filed his return of income for the Assessment year 2007-08 on 05/05/2011 declaring 'NIL' income. Thereafter order under Section 143(3) read with Section 153A(1)(b) of the Act was passed on 30/12/2011 and the returned income was accepted. It appears that search action was carried out in the case of the assessee on 04/03/2010 and subsequently notice under Section 143 of the Act was issued. After the assessment order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... amount was adjudged against carried forward book losses of earlier year. It was however noticed from return of this year and earlier year that there was no carry forward of earlier year losses under the Income Tax Act. As such set off of item of income account in this year against non available carry forward of losses of proviso year was irregular. This has resulted in user assessment of income of ₹ 3,36,396/-. In view of the above, I have as above reasons to believe that the income of the assessee company to the above extent of ₹ 3,36,396/- has escaped assessment and the case is therefore, required to be reopened under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act by way of issuing notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act. 4. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le exercise of jurisdiction by the Assessing Officer. It is submitted that as such the reassessment proceedings cannot be initiated merely on the basis of the audit objections, more particularly, when the Assessing Officer has no subjective satisfaction. Relying upon the decisions of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax, Ahmedabad IV Vs. Shilp Gravures Ltd. reported in [2013] 40 Taxmann 309 (Gujarat) and in the case of Vodafone West Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax reported in [2013] 37 Taxmann 158 (Gujarat), it is requested to allow the present Special Civil Applications and quash and set aside the reassessment proceedings. 6. To satisfy ourselves whether the reassessment proceedings ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
