9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (1) TMI 5X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat a party cannot get away by wilfully making a false or untrue statement at the time of the original assessment. - judgment under appeal passed by the learned single judge is, therefore, set aside. – Revenue’s appeal is allowed X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e was a name-lender and that he was carrying on business in the names of Gulab Chand Jainarayan, Mahindra Steel Corporation and Aruna Engineering Stores. It is noticed from the examination of the assessment record that during the previous year ended June 30, 1972, relevant to the assessment year 1973-74 the assessee had account with Aruna Engineering Stores and Gulab Chand Jainarayan which showed total credits of Rs. 45,000 and Rs. 47,000, respectively. I have, therefore, reason to believe that by reason of the omission or failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for his assessment for this year income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. It is, therefore, proposed to reopen the asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ax Officer could not be the basis for formation of the requisite belief that the assessee had concealed material particulars at the time of the assessment proceeding." In the case of Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd. v. ITO [1961] 41 ITR 191 (SC) while considering the scope of section 147(a) of the said Act, the Supreme Court observed that to confer jurisdiction under section 147(a), two conditions were to be satisfied. Firstly, the Income-tax Officer must have reason to believe that income, profits or gains chargeable to income-tax had escaped assessment. Secondly, he must also have reason to believe that such escapement had occurred by reason of either (a) omission or failure on the part of the assessee to make a return of his income under sect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The reason for the formation of the belief must be held in good faith and should not be a mere pretence. The Supreme Court of India in the case of Phool Chand Bajrang Lal v. ITO [1993] 203 ITR 456 observed that an Income-tax Officer acquired jurisdiction to reopen an assessment under section 147(a) only if, on the basis of specific, reliable and relevant information coming to his possession subsequently, he had reasons, which he must record, to believe that by reason of omission or failure on the part of the assessee to make a true and full disclosure of all material facts necessary for his assessment during the concluded assessment proceedings, any part of his income, profits or gains chargeable to income-tax had escaped assessment. He m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ers have been passed. It is for the Income-tax Officer to consider the reliability and credibility of the matter requiring reopening of the assessment and, for that matter, prima facie, the opinion of the Income-tax Officer is final at that stage and the High Court, while exercising the power under article 226 of the Constitution of India, cannot go into the sufficiency or adequacy of the materials which were considered by the Income-tax Officer while at the time of formation of the opinion. It was the jurisdiction of the Income-tax Officer to consider the materials and to initiate proceedings and when there is, prima facie, material at the hands of the Income-tax Officer, the High Court in exercise of the power under article 226 of the Con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
