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

1994 (3) TMI 56

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... f assessment proceedings, relating to purchase transactions of Rs. 10,000 and above, the assessee had shown, inter alia, purchases from one Messrs. Daswani Trading Corporation Pvt. Ltd. as under: 1964-65 Rs. 1,58,187 1965-66 Rs. 2,41,034 1966-67 Rs. 1,32,994 For the assessment year 1966-67, the assessee had also made purchases amounting to Rs. 7,692 from another concern, viz., Messrs. T. U. Patel and Sons Pvt. Ltd. This purchase transaction was not separately shown in the particulars which were furnished by the assessee, because this purchase transaction was below Rs. 10,000. While making the original assessments, the Income-tax Officer did not doubt the genuineness of these purchase transactions and, therefore, no addition was made .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for the assessments. Consequently, the assessments could not be reopened under section 147(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Being aggrieved by the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, the Revenue carried the matter in appeal before the Tribunal. The Judicial Member of the Tribunal confirmed the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner but the Accountant Member disagreed with the Judicial Member and came to a finding that the reopening of the assessments under section 147(a) of the Act was in order. At the instance of the President of the Tribunal, the matter was referred to a third member, viz., the Vice-President of the Western Z .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... necessary for the assessment. We need not examine a number of decisions on which reliance was placed by the assessee before the Tribunal as well as before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, because the question as to whether an Income-tax Officer has jurisdiction in regard to reopening of assessments under section 147(a) of the Act has now been considered at length by the Supreme Court in the case of Phool Chand Bajrang Lal v. ITO [1993] 203 ITR 456. In the case before the Supreme Court, the assessee had disclosed a cash loan taken by it from a Calcutta company. The Income-tax Officer subsequently received information that the managing director of the Calcutta company had confessed in its income-tax proceedings that the company had not .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e reopened under section 147(a). The Supreme Court has observed: "From a combined review of the judgments of this court, it follows that an Income-tax Officer acquires jurisdiction to reopen an assessment under section 147(a) read with section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, only if on the basis of specific, reliable and relevant information coming to his possession subsequently, he has 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 has escaped assessment. He may start reassessment p .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e on the record from which the requisite belief could be formed by the Income-tax Officer and further whether that material had any rational connection or a live link with the formation of the requisite belief. Therefore, we can only examine whether there was any relevant and specific material available on the record from which the requisite belief could be formed by the Income-tax Officer and further whether that material had any live link with the formation of the requisite belief. In the present case, the material which was available with the Income-tax Officer was directly relevant to the formation of the belief that the purchase transactions in question were not genuine. Whether that material was sufficient or not is not for us to de .....

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