Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether an assessment under section 23 based on voluntary returns can be validly completed beyond the normal four-year limitation in section 34(3) unless there is a prima facie case attracting clause (c) of section 28(1); (ii) Whether notices under section 22(4), section 28(1)(a) and section 46(5A) and continuing assessment action after lapse of limitation should be quashed/restrained.
Issue (i): Whether assessments on voluntary returns are time-barred where more than four years have elapsed and no notice under section 28(1)(c) was issued or there is no prima facie case of concealment.
Analysis: The statutory scheme provides a normal four-year period for completion of assessments under section 34(3). Clause (c) of section 28(1) extends limitation only where concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars is shown to be applicable. Where an earlier assessment under section 23(4) was made without invoking section 28(1)(c) and was subsequently set aside, the assessing officer, to proceed beyond the four-year period, must demonstrate at least a prima facie basis for invoking section 28(1)(c). Absent any action under section 28(1)(c) during the pendency of the earlier assessment and absent any indication on the record of concealment or inaccurate particulars, permitting indefinite postponement of assessment would nullify the statutory limitation and permit harassment.
Conclusion: The Court holds that, in the absence of a prima facie case invoking section 28(1)(c), an assessment under section 23 based on voluntary returns is time-barred after the four-year period in section 34(3). This conclusion is in favour of the assessee.
Issue (ii): Whether the notices issued under section 22(4), section 28(1)(a) and section 46(5A) and further assessment action should be quashed or restrained in the facts of the case.
Analysis: The notices under section 46(5A) and the penalty notices under section 28(1)(a) were issued while there was no showing that section 28(1)(c) applied, and the department filed no counter-affidavit disputing the allegations of harassment or alleging concealment. The assessing officer did not decide the limitation point nor indicate reliance on clause (c) of section 28(1). Given the absence of any prima facie justification to extend limitation and the Tribunal's cancellation of the earlier assessment, continuation of proceedings would amount to harassment and fall outside the officer's jurisdiction.
Conclusion: The Court quashes the notices under section 22(4), section 28(1)(a) and section 46(5A) and issues a mandamus restraining further assessment on the voluntary returns; this conclusion is in favour of the assessee.
Final Conclusion: The overall effect is that the assessing officer is barred from proceeding with fresh assessments based on the voluntary returns where more than four years have elapsed and no prima facie case for invoking section 28(1)(c) exists; the departmental notices impugned are quashed and further assessment is restrained.
Ratio Decidendi: Where an assessing officer has not invoked section 28(1)(c) and there is no prima facie evidence of concealment or inaccurate particulars, the statutory four-year limitation in section 34(3) applies and assessments on voluntary returns cannot be validly completed beyond that period.