https://www.taxtmi.com/css/info/rss_sitemap/rss_feed.css?v=1746094055 Tax Updates - Daily Update https://www.taxtmi.com Business/Tax/Law/GST/India/Taxation/Policies/Legal/Corporate Tax/Personal Tax/Vat Law/Legal Information/Tax Information/Legal Services/Tax Services Tax Management India. Com / MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd. All rights reserved. One stop solution for Direct Taxes and Indirect Taxes 2024 (8) TMI 1305 - BOMABY HIGH COURT https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757601 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757601 Validity of reopening of assessment proceedings - Impugned Notice is that the foundational ingredients of Section 147, including jurisdictional facts, are absent - notice issued beyond period of four years - as argued very issuance of the Impugned Notice purported to be without jurisdiction - HELD THAT:- A vital precondition for invoking Section 147 after the expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, is that during the original assessment, the assessee ought to have failed to fully and truly disclose all material facts necessary for the assessment. It is evident from the face of the record that the reassessment was initiated in March 2021, which is five years after the end of the Assessment Year 2015-16. As examined the sanction granted u/s 151 for the reassessment, along with reasons put up for securing the sanction. These reasons are near-identical to what was eventually provided to the Petitioner on 6th August, 2021, with one paragraph of comments missing. We find that the jurisdictional fact necessary to invoke Section 147 for reassessment is absent. Considering that the reassessment is admittedly being undertaken after the four-year period, it is necessary to show that during the original assessment, there had been a failure 0n the part of the Petitioner to disclose fully and truly, the material facts necessary for the assessment. The original assessment had been conducted pursuant to scrutiny proceedings. It entailed active examination and thorough engagement between the Petitioner and the AO - The scrutiny proceedings led to the Assessment Order, which increased the total income from the level computed in the returns. Each of the four aspects set out in the reasons for reassessment, related to facts fully disclosed by the Petitioner in the course of the original assessment. During the original assessment, a notice u/s 143 (2) had been served on the Petitioner. A notice u/s 142 (1) had also been served. These notices were responded to. Detailed written replies dated 7th December, 2017 and 11th December, 2017 had been provided. Personal hearings had also been held on 29th November, 2017 and 8th December, 2017. On each of the four counts for which reassessment is being proposed, the facts had indeed been disclosed, as is seen from the very reasons provided by the Revenue in support of initiating reassessment. Therefore, it is evident that the Revenue is now seeking to express a different opinion based on the very same facts fully disclosed during the original assessment. Sanction Mechanism u/s 151 - The power to sanction reassessment u/s 151, is coupled with a duty to exercise such power reasonably, and not arbitrarily. It is trite law that absence of valid reasons constitutes arbitrariness. In the instant case, the entire process of according sanction demonstrates non-application of mind to the ingredients of Section 147, rendering the sanction to be arbitrary, calling for intervention by a writ court. Evidently, the proposal, the recommendation and the approval in the instant case was mechanical, without either application of mind to the law and the facts or even a modicum of how the ingredients of the law had been met. In short, the machinery u/s 151 completely failed. The imperative requirement of compliance with the ingredients of Section 147 and Section 148 is underlined in innumerable judgments. Decided in favour of assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 26 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530