Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2000 (5) TMI 19

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 984-85 and 1985-86. At the outset it may be noted that the practice of this court has been not to interfere in such matters at the stage of issuance of notice and leave the aggrieved party first to answer such notice and exhaust the alternative remedies provided under the ordinary law before invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this court under article 226/227. However, in the instant case, it is noticed that the present petition stands admitted way back in 1988 and the petitioner has challenged the very jurisdiction of the Income-tax Officer, Indore, to issue the impugned notices. I, therefore, proceed to examine the merits of the case so as to find out whether any ground as envisaged under section 147(a) existed for exercising jur .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... es in question were made in favour of his own close relations and that the prevailing market price of the properties was much more than what was indicated in the sale deeds and the returns. The learned Income-tax Officer drew the aforesaid inference on the basis of certain facts discovered by him while assessing the petitioner under the Wealth-tax Act for the assessment year 1983-84. I have heard Shri P. M. Choudhary, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Shri R. L. Jain, learned counsel for the respondent. The relevant clause (a) of section 147 of the Income-tax Act, as it stood before the amendment of 1987 (with effect from 1st April, 1989), reads as follows : "147. If--- (a) the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that, by .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... . In the instant case, the petitioner had not only disclosed the facts relating to sale of his immovable properties but also filed true copies of the sale deeds along with his returns and computation sheets. The sale deeds contained all necessary particulars, i.e., full description of the properties sold, the names and other particulars of the purchasers and the sale price for which the sale was effected. All basic and primary facts were placed before the Income-tax Officer for making the assessments for the relevant years. Whether or not the sale price indicated in the sale deeds was correct and commensurate with the prevailing market price of such property, was a question of inquiry and inference to be made by the Income-tax Officer. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s, particular portions of documents, and documents and other evidence which could have been discovered by the assessing authority, from the documents and other evidence disclosed. The duty however did not extend beyond the full and truthful disclosure of all primary facts. Once all the primary facts were before the assessing authority, it was for him to decide what inferences of facts could be reasonably drawn and what legal inferences had ultimately to be drawn. It was not for anybody else-far less the assessee-to tell the assessing authority what inferences, whether of facts or law, should be drawn." The Division Bench of this court in Smt. Prabha Rajya Lakshmi v. WTO [1983] 144 ITR 180, while dealing with a similar provision of section .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... o make necessary enquiries and substitute a fair market value of the capital assets on the dates of such transfers. So far as the petitioner is concerned, his only obligation was to place the necessary basic facts before the Income-tax Officer for the relevant assessment years with regard to the value of the properties sold by him. The petitioner having done so, there was no failure on his part which would give jurisdiction to the Income-tax Officer to reopen the assessment under section 147(a). The two notices (annexures P-11 and P-12) issued by the respondent-Income-tax Officer are, therefore, liable to be quashed. In the result, this petition succeeds and is allowed. The two notices (annexures P-11 and P-12) are quashed. No order is, h .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates