9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 934X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the same should not be arbitrary, irrational, vague or irrelevant. In the absence of such material, the action taken by the respondents cannot be sustained - The case in hand, the reassessment proceedings and the consequential assessment order have been passed only on presumption and conjectures, which is not permissible under the law. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Uttar Pradesh and others vs. Aryaverth Chawal Udyog and others [2008 (5) TMI 621 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] has held that mere change of opinion while perusing the same material cannot be a “reason to believe” that a case of escaped assessment exists requiring assessment proceedings to be reopened. This Court is of the opinion that the impugned order dated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... law. Under Section 9(4) of Entry Tax Act, an assessment order dated 22.03.2013 was passed making a best judgement assessment by enhancing the purchase of cement to the tune of ₹ 10,69,675/- and imposed entry tax of ₹ 21,393/-. The petitioner assailed the said assessment order before the first appellate authority, who, by its order dated 14.08.2013, dismissed the appeal and confirmed the best judgement assessment. The petitioner has accepted the first appellate order and has not preferred any appeal. The respondent no. 2 issued notice dated 22.07.2017 under section 29(7) read with section 13 of the Entry Tax Act for granting sanction to the Assessing Authority for initiation of reassessment proceedings. The petitioner f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... which is not permissible under the law as well as by various judgements rendered by this Court as well as by the Apex Court. Rebutting the argument, the counsel for the State relied upon the two impugned orders and emphasized that the present writ petition lacks merits and the same is liable to be dismissed. On perusal of the record, it reveals that originally, the best judgment assessment was passed against the petitioner, which was confirmed by the first appellate authority, which means that the Assessing Authority, while framing the original assessment order, has gone deep into the record and verified the same and thereafter, made the best judgement assessment. The respondent no. 2, while granting permission by extending the perio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... thers (2015) 17 SCC 324 has held that mere change of opinion while perusing the same material cannot be a reason to believe that a case of escaped assessment exists requiring assessment proceedings to be reopened. The Apex Court in paragraph 30 has held as follows: 30. In case of there being a change of opinion, there must necessarily be a nexus that requires to be established between the change of opinion and the material present before the assessing authority. Discovery of an inadvertent mistake or non-application of mind during assessment would not be a justified ground to reinitiate proceedings under section 21(1) of the Act on the basis of change in subjective opinion Commissioner of Income-tax v. Dinesh Chandra H. Shah [19 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
