9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (1) TMI 1162X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inst the Petitioner at the time of disposing of the objections. Once this was not the basis for issuance of notice for Reassessment, it cannot be held against the Petitioner that the Petitioner had failed to make a true and full disclosure. It will have to be held that the Petitioner did not fail to make full and true disclosure of all material facts. The jurisdictional requirement for carrying out the reassessment, after the expiry of period of four years, is not fulfilled in the present case. - Decided in favour of assessee. - WRIT PETITION NO. 9104 OF 2014 - - - Dated:- 13-10-2014 - M.S. SANKLECHA AND N. M. JAMDAR, JJ. For The Petitioner : Mihir Naniwadekar, Advocate For The Respondent : Tejveer Singh, Advocate JUDGMENT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r promotion and publicity of their website for information for those who wanted to know the details of magazines and books published by the Petitioner. The Petitioner stated that the service provided by the America Multimedia Corporation was outside India and, therefore, the payment of ₹ 10,64,281/- was not covered under Chapter XV II B - Deduction of Tax at Source. This explanation of the Petitioner was accepted by the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer did not make any disallowance pertaining to the advertising and publishing expenses. 5. Thereafter, on 28 March 2012, the Respondent No.1 issued a notice under Section 148 of the Act in respect of the Assessment Year 2005- 2006, after four years from the end of relevant Asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the total income of U/s 40(A) failure to do so has resulted into u/a of income of ₹ 1064281/-. 3. Hence, ₹ 124622/- has escaped assessment and hence this case is reopened and notice u/s 148 is issued to the assessee. The Petitioner filed its objections on 31 January 2013, which objections were rejected by the impugned order dated 3 September 2014. 6. We have heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner and the learned counsel for the Respondent Revenue. 7. In the present case, the reassessment proceedings are sought to be initiated after the period of four years from the end of relevant Assessment Year. In view of the proviso to Section 147 of the Act, the Assessing Officer will not take any action for reassessment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itioner had failed to disclose all the relevant material was not incorporated in the Reasons supplied to the Petitioner. The object of furnishing Reasons for reopening, is to put the assessee to notice as to why the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that income has escaped assessment. Apart from this position, in the present case the Reasons supplied do not state that there was any failure on the part of the Petitioner to provide material particulars. That an assessee has not made a full and true disclosure of facts, is one of the jurisdictional requirement for proceeding with reassessment after a period of four years. In the case of Hindustan Levers v. R.B. Wadkar, [2004] 268 ITR 332, this Court had held that the notices for reassess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ther, as the Petitioner is entitled to succeed on the first ground mentioned above. 12. In the circumstances, the Petitioner is entitled to the reliefs prayed for in the Petition. It will have to be held that the Respondent No.1 had no jurisdiction to proceed with the impugned reassessment proceedings. 13. Accordingly, Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a) and (b) which read as under : (a) Issue a writ of certiorari or a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India calling for the records and quashing the impugned notice dated 28 March 2012 and the impugned order dated 3 September 2014. (b) Issue a writ of mandamus or a wri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
