1979 (7) TMI 48 - HC - Income Tax

Court upholds Income Tax Act Section 148 notices for assessment years 1955-60 despite prior settlement.

Md. Serajuddin And Brother Versus Income-Tax Officer, A-Ward, District V (2), Calcutta And Others

Md. Serajuddin And Brother Versus Income-Tax Officer, A-Ward, District V (2), Calcutta And Others - [1980] 122 ITR 465 Issues Involved:1. Challenge to the notices under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment years 1955-56 to 1959-60.2. Applicability of principles analogous to promissory estoppel.3. Compliance with Sections 147(a), 148, and 151 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.Detailed Analysis:1. Challenge to the Notices under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961:The appellant challenged five notices dated December 4, 1964, under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment years 1955-56 to 1959-60. The appellant argued that these notices were improper as the revenue authorities had already made a settlement for the assessment years 1952-53 to 1959-60 on March 27, 1961. The appellant contended that reopening the assessments contradicted the settlement terms.2. Applicability of Principles Analogous to Promissory Estoppel:The appellant's counsel emphasized that the revenue authorities had conducted thorough inquiries and investigations before the settlement, and it was improper to reopen assessments for the years covered by the settlement. The appellant argued that principles analogous to promissory estoppel should apply, preventing the authorities from reopening settled assessments, especially since no new source of income had been discovered.3. Compliance with Sections 147(a), 148, and 151 of the Income Tax Act, 1961:The court examined the relevant provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Section 147(a) allows the Income Tax Officer (ITO) to reassess income if there is reason to believe that due to the omission or failure of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts, income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. Section 148(2) requires the ITO to record his reasons before issuing any notice under Section 148. Section 151 imposes further restrictions, requiring the Board's satisfaction for notices issued after eight years and the Commissioner's satisfaction for those issued after four years.The court found that the ITO had complied with these provisions. The ITO's report, dated September 7, 1964, detailed the investigation and reasons for reopening the assessments. The report indicated substantial income escaping assessment due to under-invoicing in chrome and manganese ores, which was not fully accounted for in the earlier settlement. The ITO concluded that the assessee had adopted cunning and ingenious devices in its operational activities, resulting in the escapement of assessment.The court noted that the revenue authorities had examined books, papers, and documents not discovered or examined before the 1961 settlement. The ITO's investigation report established that the requirements of Sections 147(a), 148, and 151 had been complied with, justifying the issuance of the notices under Section 148.Conclusion:The court agreed with the learned trial judge's conclusions and dismissed the appeal. The rule issued by the court was discharged, and the application under Article 226 of the Constitution was dismissed. The court directed that an engrossed copy of the extracts from the ITO's investigation report be kept in the records of the appeal and preserved for at least five years. No order as to costs was made.Separate Judgment:S. K. Datta J. concurred with the judgment.Note: Names of parties and individuals have been omitted to maintain privacy.