2015 (10) TMI 751 - HC - Income Tax

Court affirms Tribunal's decision on invalid reassessment notice under Income Tax Act.

The Commissioner of Income Tax, The Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax Versus M/s Fibres And Fabrics International Pvt Ltd

The Court upheld the Tribunal's decision to set aside the reassessment order under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, finding the notice issued ... Reopening of assessment - Tribunal setting aside the order under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 - Held that:- Having gone through the reasons recorded for issuing notice, as well as the assessment order dated 27.12.2010, we do not find that there is any finding recorded to the effect that the assessee failed to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for the relevant assessment year. The submission of the learned counsel for the appellant is that certain deductions had been claimed on the basis of an agreement under which commission was paid by the assessee and since after the survey conducted on 5.11.2009, it was found that the agreement was not genuine, it would amount to failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts and thus the notice could have been issued beyond the period of four years under the first proviso to Section 147 of the Act. In our opinion, since such reason has not even been specified in the reasons recorded in the notice or in the assessment order itself, the notice issued beyond the period of four years has rightly been held to be invalid by the learned Tribunal. The Tribunal has rightly relied on the decision of this Court in the case of Hewelett Packard Digital Global Soft Ltd., (2011 (9) TMI 800 - Karnataka High Court ) and as such do not find any infirmity with the order of the Tribunal. - Decided against revenue. Issues:1. Validity of notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for reopening assessment.2. Reassessment order under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 challenged by the assessee.3. Tribunal's decision to set aside the assessment order.4. Appeal filed by the Revenue challenging the Tribunal's decision.5. Interpretation of the law regarding failure to disclose fully and truly all material facts by the assessee for reopening assessment.Analysis:1. The appeal was filed by the Revenue challenging the Tribunal's decision to set aside the reassessment order under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The notice issued under Section 148 for reopening the assessment was held to be invalid by the Tribunal. The Tribunal relied on the judgment in a similar case where it was established that reopening the assessment is only valid if there is a failure on the part of the assessee to disclose all material facts necessary for assessment.2. The respondent-assessee, a company engaged in the manufacture and sale of garments, had declared its income for the relevant assessment year. A survey conducted in the premises revealed certain expenses debited to the Profit & Loss Account, including payments to foreign companies. The reassessment was initiated based on these findings, alleging that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment. The reassessment order was challenged by the assessee, leading to an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and subsequently before the Tribunal.3. The Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal and set aside the assessment order, prompting the Revenue to file an appeal challenging this decision. The substantial question of law raised was whether the Tribunal was correct in setting aside the reassessment order without appreciating the conclusive material on record for the reassessment proceedings.4. The Revenue contended that the notice for reopening the assessment was issued beyond the statutory period but argued that it was justified due to the failure of the assessee to disclose all material facts fully and truly. However, the Court found that there was no finding indicating such failure in the reasons recorded for issuing the notice or in the assessment order itself. The Tribunal's decision was upheld based on the lack of specific reasons for reopening the assessment beyond the four-year period.5. The Court dismissed the appeal, stating that no substantial question of law arose for determination. The decision was based on the absence of evidence demonstrating the failure of the assessee to disclose all material facts necessary for assessment, as required for a valid reopening of the assessment under the Income Tax Act.