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: Whether reassessment under section 34(1)(b) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 could be validly initiated on the basis of information already in the Income-tax Officer's possession before the assessment stood rectified under section 35.
Analysis: Section 34(1)(b) required the Income-tax Officer to have, in consequence of information in his possession, reason to believe that income had escaped assessment, been under-assessed, or assessed at too low a rate. On the facts, the relevant information showing that a part of the assessee's income was taxable at Indian Union rates was already available before the rectification order under section 35. The under-assessment, if any, arose only because of the rectification order itself. Information that existed before the under-assessment came into existence could not satisfy the statutory condition for reopening under section 34(1)(b). The rectification order did not create a basis for treating prior information as subsequent information for the purpose of reassessment.
Conclusion: Reassessment under section 34(1)(b) was not justified; the question was answered in the negative in favour of the assessee.
Ratio Decidendi: Information relied upon for reopening under section 34(1)(b) must be subsequent to the under-assessment sought to be corrected and must come into possession of the Income-tax Officer after the assessment has become under-assessed.