Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →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 the reassessment proceedings initiated on the basis of income already declared under the Income Declaration Scheme could survive after issuance of Form 4 and whether the impugned notices and consequential orders were liable to be quashed.
Analysis: The declaration under the Income Declaration Scheme was not disputed, and the respondents' own affidavit accepted that the tax credit issue and correction of challan head would result in issuance of Form 4. Once Form 4 was issued, the declared income stood regularised for the purposes of the Scheme. The reopening was founded on the same declared amount and therefore the alleged escapement of income had no independent basis. In those circumstances, the foundation for the notices under sections 148 and 148A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and the connected demand and penalty proceedings, could not be sustained.
Conclusion: The reassessment notices and consequential orders were without jurisdiction and were quashed, in favour of the assessee.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the revenue accepts issuance of Form 4 under the Income Declaration Scheme in relation to the declared income, reassessment on the very same declared amount cannot be sustained for alleged escapement of income.