9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (9) TMI 644X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot satisfied. Moreover, even as regards the first condition, namely, that the Assessing Officer should record satisfaction that income chargeable to tax should have escaped assessment, in the light of the reasons recorded by this court in the case of Shri Chalthan Vibhag Khand Udhyog Sahakari Mandali Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (2015 (7) TMI 297 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT ), it cannot be said that on the reasons recorded for reopening the assessment, the Assessing Officer could have formed the belief that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. Therefore, even the first condition precedent for exercise of powers under section 147 of the Act, is not satisfied. Under the circumstances, the impugned notice issued under section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... th a notice dated 18.08.2015 issued under section 142(1) of the Act. The petitioner filed its objections by a letter dated 23.09.2015, which came to be rejected by an order dated 20.12.2015. Thereafter, brushing aside the mandatory time of one month as laid down by this court in the case of Garden Finance Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, (2004) 268 ITR 48 (Guj.), wherein it has been held that the Assessing Officer should not proceed further with the reassessment proceeding for a period of one month from the date of dispatch of the order disposing of the objections, the respondent on the eighth day of the order disposing of the objections, passed the reassessment order. Being aggrieved, the petitioner has filed the present petit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -10 and 2010-11. It was further submitted that the above decision of this court was carried before the Supreme Court and the special leave petition filed against the said decision came to be dismissed and hence the said decision has attained finality. Reference was also made to an unreported decision of this court in the case of Shri Narmada Khand Udhyog Sahkari Mandali Ltd. v. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1) rendered on 02.02.2016 in Special Civil Application No.16593 of 2015 and allied matters wherein, the court had followed the earlier decision in the case of Shri Chalthan Vibhag Khand Udhyog Sahakari Mandali Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (supra) and had quashed the notice under section 148 of the Act in a case relating to reop ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... terial facts. 7. In the facts of the present case, the impugned notice under section 148 of the Act has been issued on 18.03.2015 for reopening the assessment for assessment year 2008-09, which is clearly beyond a period of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year. Under the circumstances, in view of the first proviso to section 147 of the Act, the Assessing Officer is required to record twin satisfaction, viz., that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment and that such escapement is by reason of failure on the part of the petitioner to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for its assessment for the year under consideration. On a perusal of the reasons recorded it is amply clear that there is nothi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
