9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (7) TMI 959X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aterial facts necessary for his assessment. The very intention of the provision is to ensure that even in cases where there was an omission or commission or by mistake certain particulars or details were not given by the assessee at the time of original assessment, after reopening of the assessment, the assessee shall produce all those documents, which were omitted, left out as well as the informations. Thus, the provision do not doubt about the integrity of an assessee u/s147 unless a contrary is established by the AO. This Court is of the opinion that assessment/re-assessment is to be completed by following the procedures contemplated. The scope of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitute of India is to scrutinise the processes through which the decision is taken by the competent authority by following the procedures as contemplated under law, but not the decision itself. In the present case, the directives issued in the case of GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. [ 2002 (11) TMI 7 - SUPREME COURT] have been followed and the assessee was given opportunity to submit their objections and the petitioner had rightly availed the opportunity and the said objections were a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... relevant details, informations along with the books of accounts etc. It was taken up for scrutiny assessment and a notice was issued under Section 142(1) of the Act by the Assessing Officer on 13.08.2012. The petitioner responded to the notice by furnishing all required details sought for in the notice dated 13.08.2012 on 14.09.2012. The petitioner filed details of interest received on 30.10.2012. Further, the details regarding the pre-operative expenses were also furnished to the Assessing Officer on 08.11.2012. Justification for adjustment of interest against pre-operative expenses was also furnished. Considering all these documents as well as the informations and details provided by the assessee, the Assessing Officer passed the final order of assessment on 14.03.2013 for the assessment year 2010-11. 5.The learned Senior Counsel referring to the return of income filed by the petitioner, the details of tax deducted at source on income and the list of companies furnished by the Assessing Officer for reopening of the assessment, contended that the details now relied on by the Department for reopening of the assessment as well as the details furnished by the petitioner during th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l have to be disallowed and considered for tax incidence. The concerned assessment year is 2010- 11 only. Based on the above I have reason to believe that income has escaped from assessment for A.Y.2010-11. 8.Relying on the said reasons, the learned Senior Standing Counsel reiterated that it is a new information gathered by the Assessing Officer, after passing of the assessment order dated 14.03.2013 for the assessment year 2010-11. It is stated that the information has been gathered at the assessee-company and it was found that their entities were not genuinely engaged in the business of sale of software. Not only the purchases made by the assessee-company but also the depreciation claimed will have to be disallowed and considered for tax incidence. With reference to the informations gathered and the reason given that the entities were not genuinely engaged in the business of sale of software, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of Section 147 of the Act. The informations gathered are new tangible materials and therefore, an assessment/re- assessment is to be made. When it is a new material, which was not adjudicated and such material was suppressed by the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Income-tax Officer reported in (2003) 259 ITR 19(SC). Reasons were furnished. The assessee submitted its objections and the said objections were disposed of. Thus, the Assessing officer may be allowed to proceed further for assessment/reassessment and the assessee has to cooperate and if at all any other documents are available, it is for them to produce the same before the Assessing Officer and thus, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. 11.Considering the arguments as advanced on behalf of the respective parties to the lis on hand, this Court is of the opinion that the scope of Section 147 under the Act is wider enough to cover various circumstances under which reopening of assessment shall be done by the authority competent. As rightly pointed out by the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, within four years and beyond four years, there is a distinction. Within four years, the Assessing Officer, if has reason to believe that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for any assessment year, can reopen the assessment. However, beyond the period of four years, certain conditions are to be fulfilled. 12.Proviso to Section 147 of the Act contemplates t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y would indicate that there is some suppression. Thus, even in the said two circumstances, the assessee gets an opportunity to furnish the details or clarify the position or defend their case by availing the opportunities to be provided by the Assessing Officer while passing an order of assessment/re-assessment. 14.This Court is of the considered opinion that the facts disputed cannot be gone into by the High Court in a Writ proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, which is to be done with reference to the documents as well as the evidences made available before the competent authority. 15.The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner relied on the informations provided by the assessee in the return of income as well as the details provided in the subsequent letters by the assessee. However, those informations are disputed by the respondents by stating that the information has been gathered and the entities were not genuinely engaged in the business of sale of software. The reasons were responded by the assessee by submitting objections. The said objections were also considered by the Assessing Officer and the same were disposed of vide order dated 01.08.2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... books of accounts by assessee before Assessing Officer, cannot lead to the presumption that all books have been perused and examined by the Assessing Authority. It is duty of assessee to show all relevant particulars in books of accounts, not mere production of boos, arguments that Assessing Officer could have been discovered is not correct as held in the case of Kantamaneni Venkatnarayana by Hon'ble Supreme Court 63 ITR 638. 16.The Assessing Officer has dealt with the objections raised by the petitioner that the reopening of proceedings beyond the period of four years is without jurisdiction. 17.Considering the findings given in the order disposing of the objections, this Court is of the opinion that assessment/re-assessment is to be completed by following the procedures contemplated. The scope of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitute of India is to scrutinise the processes through which the decision is taken by the competent authority by following the procedures as contemplated under law, but not the decision itself. In the present case, the directives issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. (supra) have been ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
