TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (5) TMI 95
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Tech at Karnal and books of accounts pertaining to Gupta & Gupta Agro Tech were impounded. The respondent-assessee is the proprietor of Gupta & Gupta Agrotech. Statement of the respondent-assessee was also recorded by the Additional Director of Income Tax (Investigation), Ambala. Assessment Year 1995-96 4. The assessee had not filed return of income under Section 139 of the Act for the assessment year 1995-96. The Assessing Officer recorded reasons under Section 147 and notice under Section 148 was issued on 21st January, 1997. In response, the respondent-assessee filed a return declaring income of Rs.42,500/- on 30th June, 1997. The assessment was completed under Section 144 of the Act vide order dated 29th January, 1999. This order was set aside by the tribunal on the ground that the statutory notice under Section 143(2) was not served on the respondent-assessee within the stipulated period of 12 months from the end of the month in which return was filed. 5. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer recorded fresh reasons and notice under Section 147/148 of the Act was issued and served on the respondent-assessee on 23rd March, 2002. The respondent-assessee challenged the said notice....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....se reasons, there is no reference to any fresh information. The Assessing Officer again reiterated the stand which was taken by him while issuing the first notice for reopening of assessment. The second notices issued under sec.148 of the Act for reopening of both these assessments were issued admittedly after expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year. The assessment in the first instance was made under sec. 147 read with sec.143(3) of the Act. The interdiction provided in the proviso appended to sec. 147 putting an embargo upon the powers of the Assessing Officer for issuing notice under sec. 148 in the cases, where four years have expired from the end of the relevant assessment year and where assessment was made under sec.143(3) or under sec. 147 would come in the way of Assessing Officer. He has been denuded from his powers to issue notices for reopening of assessment after expiry of four years if an assessment has been made under sec. 143(3) or under sec. 147 of the Act. The Assessing Officer can only issue the notice under sec. 148 in such cases if it is established that full and true particulars were not disclosed by the assessee for his assessment in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... again without trading account, profit and loss account, capital account and balance sheet etc. 10. The Assessing Officer completed assessment vide order dated 16th March, 2004 and the income of the respondent-assessee was assessed at Rs.17,50,300/-. The assessee did not succeed in the first appeal. The tribunal by the same order dated 11th December, 2009, allowed the appeal of the assessee for the reasons which have been set out and quoted above. 11. The facts elucidated above clearly show that the tribunal has quashed/set aside the original proceedings on the technical ground that statutory notice under Section 143(2) was not served on the respondent-assessee within the stipulated period of 12 months from the month in which return was filed. 12. The Assessing Officer thereafter had recorded fresh reasons and issued notice under Section 147/148 of the Act. The reasons to believe now recorded have to stand on their own legs and are separate from the reasons to believe, which were recorded earlier before initiation of the re-assessment proceedings, which abated. The said reasons to believe and issue of notice under Section 147/148 of the Act cannot be faulted and rejected on the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s opinion has escaped assessment. After hearing counsel for the petitioner and having gone through the writ petition, we are satisfied that the Income Tax Officer had prima facie reasonable basis to believe that the income in the hands of the assessee had escaped assessment as stated in the reasons contained in Annexure P-5. In response to the notice the petitioner has submitted his reply talking all possible objections including the one that the Income Tax Officer has no jurisdiction to deal with the matter. WE have no doubt in our mind that the Income Tax Officer will decide all the issue raised by the petitioner while making the final assessment under Section 147 of the Act. There is no ground for us to interfere at this stage. Dismissed." 14. At this stage, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that this is a case of change of opinion and, therefore, the re-assessment proceedings have not been validly initiated. We do not find any merit in the said contention. In the present case, the original/first assessment/re-assessment proceedings were struck down on the ground that the notice under Section 143(2) was not served within the statutory time limit/period. The tribunal, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t paid otherwise by way of tax or interest, an intimation was to be sent without prejudice to the provisions of Section 143(2) to the assessee specifying the sum so payable and such intimation was deemed to be a notice of demand issued under Section 156. The first proviso to Section 143(1)(a) allowed the Department to make certain adjustments in the income or loss declared in the return. They were as follows: (a) an arithmetical error in the return, accounts and documents accompanying it were to be rectified; (b) any loss carried forward, deduction, allowance or relief which on the basis of the information available in such return, accounts or documents, was prima facie admissible, but which was not claimed in the return was to be allowed; (c) any loss carried forward, relief claimed in the return which on the basis of the information as available in such returns, accounts or documents were prima facie inadmissible was to be disallowed. 12. What were permissible under the first proviso to Section 143(1)(a) to be adjusted were, (i) only apparent arithmetical errors in the return, accounts or documents accompanying the return, (ii) loss carried forward, deduction allowance or relief....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....essing officer proceeds on his opinion on the basis of the return filed by the assessee. The very fact that no opportunity of being heard is given under Section 143(1)(a) indicates that the assessing officer has to proceed accepting the return and making the permissible adjustments only. As a result of insertion of the Explanation to Section 143 by the Finance (No. 2) Act of 1991 with effect from 1-10-1991, and subsequently with effect from 1-6-1994, by the Finance Act, 1994, and ultimately omitted with effect from 1-6-1999, by the Explanation as introduced by the Finance (No. 2) Act of 1991 an intimation sent to the assessee under Section 143(1)(a) was deemed to be an order for the purposes of Section 246 between 1-6-1994 to 31-5-1999, and under Section 264 between 1-10-1991, and 31-5-1999. It is to be noted that the expressions "intimation" and "assessment order" have been used at different places. The contextual difference between the two expressions has to be understood in the context the expressions are used. Assessment is used as meaning sometimes "the computation of income", sometimes "the determination of the amount of tax payable" and sometimes "the whole procedure laid do....