9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (8) TMI 730X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ncome on account of provisions created for retiring benefits and on account of provisions created for Group Gratuity Scheme - the mere production of account books or other evidence from which material evidence with due diligence could have been discovered by the AO, would not amount to disclosure - the AO while recording reasons for issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act had rightly held that there was no true and full disclosure and initiation of proceedings within four years from the end of the AY 2009-10 was valid – Decided against Assessee. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er Section 143(3) of the Act. Accordingly, notice under section 148 of the Act was issued to the petitioner bank on the issue of payment of Group Gratuity to LIC to the extent of ₹ 2,20,18,280/-. The petitioner filed income tax return for the assessment year 2009-2010 on 30.9.2009 declaring income at ₹ 1,59,93,730/- which was processed under section 143(1) of the Act. Notice under section 143(2) of the Act was issued on 23.8.2010. The assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act was completed on 25.11.2011 wherein the Assessing officer accepted the return of income by duly accepting the issue of retirement benefit and Group gratuity scheme amount. The petitioner received notice dated 24.3.2014 under section 148 of the Act. It file ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Court in Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi Vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd, (2010) 320 ITR 561. Challenge was also laid with the contention that audit objection could not form valid basis for reopening a concluded assessment. Reliance was also placed on judgments in Cartini India Limited vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax and Others, (2009) 224 CTR (Bom) 82, CIT vs. Lucas TVS Limited, (2001) 17 STC 289 (SC), Carlton Overseas Pvt. Limited vs. ITO and another, (2010) 229 CTR (Del) 439, Satnam Overseas Limited and another vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, (2010) 228 CTR (Del.) 121, Radhasoami Satsang vs. CIT, CWP No.14178 of 2014 4 (1991) 100 CTR (SC) and Parashuram Pottery Works Co. Limited vs. ITO AIR 1977 SC 49 in support of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ; 2,34,38,315/- in the hands of the assessee. Under the Income Tax Act, provisions made in the accounts for unascertained liabilities are not deductible. Keeping in view the facts narrated above, I am of the opinion that this is a fit case to issue notice under Section 148 in the case. Issue notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961." Relying upon Explanation 1 to Section 147 of the Act, the objections raised by the assessee for issuance of notice under Section 148 of the Act were rejected. 6. Explanation I to Section 147 of the Act which is relevant for adjudication of the present petition reads thus:- "Production before the Assessing Officer of account books or other evidence from which material evidence could, with due d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
