2005 (4) TMI 49

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ority would not be empowered to assume jurisdiction to initiate the proceeding. - requirement of recording reasons would not stand satisfied if without mentioning any reason the authority simply writes that he has reasons to believe that income had escaped assessment. This kind of exercise of power must be held to be an abuse of the power. I am therefore, of the view that the authority acted illegally and without jurisdiction in issuing the impugned notice to the petitioner; and hence it is liable to be set aside
Judge(s) : JAYANTA KUMAR BISWAS. JUDGMENT Jayanta Kumar Biswas J.- The writ petitioner is aggrieved by the notice issued by the tax authority under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for reopening the case regarding the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... visit was made on December 23, 1996, for verification of machinery and actual activities. It is seen that the assessee has made such progress due to the scientific research and saved time as well as money. Softwares were developed for multi channel control on total work of newspaper. Further development work is in progress." On the basis of the findings recorded in his order the Assessing Officer granted the petitioner their claim of tax benefit on account of purchase of machinery for scientific research and development work. The order of the Assessing Officer attained finality and it was not questioned by either of the parties in any manner, till the time the authority issued the impugned notice dated September 27, 2000, seeking to reopen .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... atutory conditions necessary for assumption of jurisdiction by the authority concerned were existing for the purpose of issuing the notice under challenge. Under the provisions of the Act the authority was not empowered to reopen the case on the ground that the claimed deduction under section 35 had been wrongly allowed. I must say that counsel for the Revenue has referred to the last sentence of the document in which the competent authority recorded the reasons for reopening, also for no useful purpose. I have no doubt in my mind that by simply saying that he had reasons to believe that the amount of income (mentioned in the reasons) had escaped assessment, the authority would not be empowered to assume jurisdiction to initiate the proceed .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X