9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (8) TMI 267X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e facts of the case are that the assessee is running a brick-klin in the name and style of Raya Int Udyog of which he is the proprietor. The return of income for all the years was accepted by the AO under s. 143(1) of the Act. However, subsequent to assessment order, information was received by the AO to the effect that there was difference in the sales turnover declared before the ST authorities as well as assessed by them vis-a-vis the sales turnover declared by the assessee before the AO. The relevant figures for all the years are as under: Asst. yr. Sales disclosed to IT Department Sales before ST Department Assessed by ST Department Period Amount Period Amount 1982-83 1-10-80 to 30-9-81 2,94,249 1-4-82 to 31-3-83 2,43,403 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5,21,857 Escaped Income brought to tax - 1,59,143 Asst. yr. 1985-86 Sales declared by ST AO 7,25,651 Less : Sales declared to ST Department - 4,78,357 Escaped/brought to income-tax 2,47,294 The AO also made some other additions on account of excess consumption of coal. 6. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the appeal was filed. It was claimed before the CIT(A) that the AO has wrongly assumed jurisdiction under s. 148 of the Act. It was stated that when the AO started fresh assessment proceedings, the assessee had challenged the reopening of the assessment by stating that holding understatement of income on the basis of the assessment order by the ST AO was not justified because the same had not become final. It was stated that a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... which also included the addition on account of extra consumption of coal for asst. ys. 1982-83, 1983-84, 1984-85 and 1985-86 respectively. 9. The assessee is in appeal before us against the findings of the CIT(A) to the effect that the AO was justified in reopening the assessment of all the years by issue of notice under s. 148 of the Act. 10`. The Revenue is also in appeal before us against the deletion of the addition made by AO as mentioned above. 11. It is argued by the learned counsel that the AO was incorrect in observing that there was difference in figures between the sales declared by the assessee and the sales assessed by the ST Department. He has stated that for the purposes of income-tax, sales for the previous year, which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he rejection of accounts and determination of total turnover were two different procedures. In such a case, the determination of turnover depends on certain relevant factors such as capacity of the Klin, firing period and average selling rates. It was stated that the decision of the Sales-tax Tribunal was not available with the assessee by the time the CIT(A) passed the order upholding the validity of reassessment proceedings. Regarding sales turnover for asst. yr. 1983-84, the learned counsel stated that the Sales-tax Tribunal has determined the turnover at Rs. 3,19,936 as against the sales turnover of Rs. 3,09,617 disclosed to the ST Department. It was stated that this minor difference in the sales turnover of about Rs. 10,000 also cannot ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rd vide its Circular No. 549, dt. 31st Oct., 1989 has clarified that if the reopening of an assessment takes place by issue of notice on 1st April, 1989 or afterwards though relatable to the earlier assessment years, the amended provisions will apply. Under the amendment provisions, if the AO has reason to believe that any income chargeable to tax, has escaped assessment, he will proceed to assess or reassess such income. The word "reason" in the phrase "reason to believe" would mean cause or justification to think or suppose that income has escaped assessment. The words "reason to believe" cannot mean that the AO should have finally asserted the facts by legal evidence. The formation of "belief" is not a judicial decision but an administra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessed the sales turnover of the assessee at a higher figure and on this basis, the AO arrived on the conclusion that the sales have been understated by the assessee. He did not realise that the sales turnover determined by the ST authorities/AO was subject to final adjudication by the appellate authorities. The assessee has furnished the sales turnover as determined by the Trade Tax Tribunal. Actually, in the asst. yrs. 1982-83, 1984-85 and 1985-86, the Trade Tax Tribunal has accepted the sales turnover declared by the assessee. There is a minor difference of sales turnover in the asst. yr. 1983-84. Such minor difference of about Rs. 10,000 was on account of different periods under the IT Act as well as the ST Act. Considering the facts a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
