9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (3) TMI 499X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rgeable to tax has escaped assessment. Submission of Revenue that powers of re-opening within a period of four years from the end of assessment year is very wide ignores the fact that even in cases of less than four years, there must be reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. In the absence of condition precedent under Section 147 of the Act being satisfied, no notice for re-opening of an assessment can be sustained. - Decided in favour of assessee. - WRIT PETITION (L) NO.3292 OF 2014 - - - Dated:- 29-1-2015 - M.S. SANKLECHA AND G.S. KULKARNI, JJ. For The Petitioner : Prakash Shah and Jas Sanghavi For The Respondent : Arvind Pinto ORDER 1. At the request of the Counsel, the Petition i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ,642/- per shares. The amount received by the assessee from M/s. Blackstone GPV Capital Partners Mauritius during the previous year was of ₹ 64,59,38,591/-. M/s. Blackstone GPV Capital Partners Mauritius is the holding company, located at Mauritius. As per the schedule 13 of the Audited accounts, under the head related parties disclosures it was mentioned that M/s. Blackstone GPV Capital Partners Mauritius is a Share holder with 75.98% shares of the assessee company. Thus the amount of ₹ 64,59,38,591/-received by the assessee from M/s. Blackstone GPV Capital Partners Mauritius constitutes international transaction as per the provision of Sec. 92. The assessee has not submitted an audit report in the form no. 3CEB in respect o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... GPV Capital Partners Mauritius had purchased 11,401/- which requires adjustment of ₹ 56,53,18,585/- on account of arms length price. Thus the income chargeable to tax was under assesseed to the extent of ₹ 56,53,18,585/- in the assessment order u/s. 143(3) passed on 28.10.2011 on account of transactions with related party not at arms length price. In view of the above facts, I have reasons to believe that the income chargeable to tax of ₹ 56,56,18,585/- has escaped assessment within the meaning of the provisions of sec 147 of the I. T. Act for the A. Y. 2009-10. I hereby reopen the case of the assessee u/s 147 of the I. T. Act. 5. The Petitioner by their letter dated 9th July, 2014 filed their objections to the rea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rm 3 CEB, indicating an international transaction for the purpose of arriving at ALP in respect of issue of shares at premium to the Petitioner by its holding company; (b) Re-opening of assessment was done by the Assessing Officer by a notice dated 31st March, 2014. This was prior to the decision of this Court in Vodafone Services (supra) and, therefore, it is insisted that no fault can be found with the re-opening notice; and (c) The re-opening of the notice being done within four years from the end of the relevant Assessment Year. No interference is called for as the Assessing Officer has wide power to re-open an assessment within four years. 8. We find that the issue arising in the present Petition namely seeking to bring to tax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hich stood at all times. Thus in the face of the decision of this Court in Vodafone India Services (supra), the impugned notice is unsustainable. 11. The last submission of Mr. Pinto on behalf of the Revenue that powers of re-opening within a period of four years from the end of assessment year is very wide. This submission ignores the fact that even in cases of less than four years, there must be reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. In the absence of condition precedent under Section 147 of the Act being satisfied, no notice for re-opening of an assessment can be sustained. 12. Accordingly, Petition is allowed. The impugned notice dated 31st March, 2014 is quashed and set aside. - - TaxTMI - TMI ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
