9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (3) TMI 188X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... are substantial questions of law raised in this Appeal. "i) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble ITAT is justified in quashing the assessment proceedings, holding that the AO had failed to record 'reasons to believe that the income has escaped assessment' within the meaning of Section 147 read with Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961? ii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble ITAT is justified in quashing the assessment proceedings, even when the assessing officer on the basis of tangible material (information by investigation wing) had a reason to believe that the income had escaped assessment before reopening the assessment. iii) Whether in the facts and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the learned Counsel for the Parties. 6. As regards the question of law raised based on Rule 27 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963. The learned Counsel for the Appellant-Revenue relying on the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-Tax-4 v. Jamnadas Virji Shares & Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. [2012] 21 taxmann.com 27 (Bom.) and submitted that it was not permissible for the Tribunal to entertain the additional ground of challenge regarding the legality of notice under Sections 147 and 148 of the Income Tax Act. The learned Counsel submitted that no specific challenge was raised and the Respondent-Assessee had submitted to the jurisdiction. 7. It is not possible to accept the submission ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ween the statement that there is a reason to believe that income as escaped assessment with the rest of the Reasons supplied. It is not permissible, as rightly noted by the Tribunal, to add to the Reasons. The contention that there was an information received was not included in the Reasons. The Tribunal has followed the decision of the Jurisdictional High Court, dated 7 April 2015 in the case of Nivi Trading Limited in Writ Petition No.2314 of 2015. If the Tribunal in these facts and circumstances has found that the reopening of assessment was without jurisdiction based on reading of the Reasons, it cannot be said that any perverse or illegal view has been taken by the Tribunal. No question of law arises. The Appeal is dismissed. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
