1997 (3) TMI 87 - HC - Income Tax

Court allows income tax assessment reopening for non-disclosure of material facts

The High Court upheld the Income-tax Officer's decision to reopen the assessment for the year 1959-60 based on discrepancies in the assessee's claims, ... Assessment Year, Failure To Disclose Material Facts, Wealth Tax Act, Wealth Tax Return Issues:Reopening of assessment under section 147 of the Income-tax Act based on information from a subsequent assessment year.Analysis:The High Court of Bombay was tasked with deciding whether the Income-tax Officer was justified in reopening the assessment for the assessment year 1959-60 based on information obtained from the assessment under the Wealth-tax Act for the assessment year 1960-61. The court noted that the controversy was settled by a Supreme Court decision in Sri Krishna Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO [1996] 221 ITR 538, which emphasized the obligation of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment. The Supreme Court held that a false assertion of material fact attracts the jurisdiction of the Income-tax Officer under section 34/147.In the present case, the Income-tax Officer reopened the assessment for the assessment year 1959-60 after finding discrepancies in the assessee's claim of sale of jewellery and subsequent investigation. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the Tribunal upheld the Income-tax Officer's decision. The Supreme Court's ruling in Sri Krishna Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO was applied to the facts of this case, where the Income-tax Officer had reasons to believe that the assessee had put forward false unsecured hundi loans, leading to the escape of taxable income. The court emphasized that the obligation to disclose all material facts fully and truly is essential for assessment.The court highlighted that the assessee's failure to disclose material facts, such as the bogus nature of loans from non-existent persons, provided reasonable grounds for the Income-tax Officer to believe that income had escaped assessment. The court concluded that the principles laid down by the Supreme Court decision applied to the present case, and therefore, the reopening of the assessment for the assessment year 1959-60 was justified. The court answered the question referred in the affirmative, in favor of the Revenue and against the assessee.In conclusion, the reference was disposed of accordingly, with no order as to costs. The judgment reaffirmed the importance of full and true disclosure of material facts by the assessee for the assessment process, as mandated by the Income-tax Act.