TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>High Court quashes Income Tax Act s.148 notice for reassessment, citing lack of jurisdiction & change of opinion.</h1> <h3>Kamalchand Versus Income-Tax Officer, Dhar, And Another</h3> The High Court of Madhya Pradesh quashed the notice under s. 148 of the Income Tax Act for reassessment of the assessment years 1975-76, 1976-77, and ... Reassessment Issues involved: Petitions under arts. 226 and 227 challenging notice under s. 148 of the Income Tax Act for reassessment under s. 147(b) for the assessment years 1975-76, 1976-77, and 1977-78.Judgment Details:Issue 1: Jurisdiction to reopen assessment under s. 147(b) of the Act The court considered the reasons given by respondent No. 1 for reopening the assessment for the years in question. It was noted that no new information had come to light, and it appeared to be a mere change of opinion by the assessing officer. Citing the Supreme Court decision in Indian and Eastern Newspaper Society v. CIT, it was held that an error discovered on reconsideration of the same material does not give the assessing officer the power to reopen the assessment. As such, the court concluded that respondent No. 1 had no jurisdiction to issue the notice under s. 148 of the Act and proceed with reassessment for the mentioned years.Issue 2: Legal Precedent and Conclusion Drawing on legal precedents, the court emphasized that a change of opinion based on the same material from the original assessment does not warrant reopening the assessment. In light of the Supreme Court's clear pronouncement on the matter, the court allowed the petitions, quashed the notice issued by respondent No. 1 for reassessment, and directed the refund of the outstanding security deposit to the petitioner after verification. The parties were ordered to bear their own costs in this regard.In conclusion, the High Court of Madhya Pradesh held that the notice under s. 148 of the Income Tax Act for reassessment of the assessment years 1975-76, 1976-77, and 1977-78, along with the reassessment proceedings, were quashed due to the assessing officer's lack of jurisdiction in reopening the assessments based on a mere change of opinion without new information.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
