TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (6) TMI 315
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ter four years from the end of the assessment year is illegal, barred by time limitation and without jurisdiction. 3. The notice under section 148 has been issued on the basis of change of opinion and such notice is illegal, bad in law and without jurisdiction. 4. That the notice issued under section 148 has been issued without any approval of the Chief Commissioner or Commissioner of the Income-tax on the reason recorded by the ld. Assessing Officer as required under section 151(1) of the Act, hence, the same is illegal and bad in law. 5. That the alleged escaped income is below one lakh, hence the Notice issued under section 148 is bad in law and without jurisdiction. 6. That no Notice under section 143(2) has been issued within 12 months from the end of the month in which the return is filed, hence the reassessment framed is illegal, bad in law and without jurisdiction and no addition could have been made by the Assessing Officer. The notice issued under section 143(2) on 23-3-2009 is much before the service of notice under section 148 and the same is illegal and bad in law and do not conform with the legal requirem....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ully and there is no such allegation in the reasons recorded hence the notice issued under section 148 after four years from the end of the assessment year is illegal, barred by time limitation and without jurisdiction. 3. The notice under section 148 has been issued on the basis of change of opinion and such notice is illegal, bad in law and without jurisdiction. 4. That the notice issued under section 148 has been issued without any approval of the Chief Commissioner or Commissioner of the Income-tax on the reason recorded by the ld. Assessing Officer as required under section 151(1) of the Act, hence, the same is illegal and bad in law. 5. That no Notice under section 143(2) has been issued within 12 months from the end of the month in which the return is filed, hence the reassessment framed is illegal, bad in law and without jurisdiction and no addition could have been made by the Assessing Officer. The notice issued under section 143(2) on 23-3-2009 is much before the service of notice under section 148 and the same is illegal and bad in law and do not conform with the legal requirements. 6. That the directions is....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....0,80,967 which was assessed project-wise as under:- Income declared from Srinagar-Nagpur Project to be fixed at 15% Rs. 1,30,000 Income from Ahmedabad-Vadodra Project to be fixed at 20% Rs. 1,11,73,007 Interest on fixed deposit In Srinagar-Nagpur Project Rs.2,67,440 In Ahmedabad-Vadodra Project to be fixed at 48% Rs.1,07,502 Rs. 3,74,942 (ii) The Assessing Officer initiated reassessment proceedings vide notice dated 23-3-2009 along with reasons recorded on 17-3-2009 and copies of notice and reasons are placed at pages 38-40 of the paper book. As per reasons recorded in the assessment order for assessment year 2006-07 which was passed on 18-12-2008, it was noticed that the assessee was wrongly computing its tax liability since beginning being lesser of tax payable @ 41.82 per cent or 42 per cent of net profit of PE or tax @ 20.91 per cent on gross amount of FTS. It is mentioned in the reasons that keeping in view that fact, the income of the assessee from Srinagar-Nagpur project has wrongly been computed and surcharge and cess (as applicabl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....se of power of reassessment by the Assessing Officer is contrary to the proviso to section 147 and are required to be quashed. Ld. AR also relied upon the decisions of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the cases of Wel Intertrade (P.) Ltd. v. ITO [2009] 308 ITR 22/178 Taxman 27 and Haryana Acrylic Manufacturing Co. v. CIT [2009] 308 ITR 38/[2008] 175 Taxman 262 (Delhi). He submitted that following the aforementioned decisions of the jurisdictional High Court, the Tribunal vide its order dated 19-12-2010 in the case of Dy. CIT v. Microsoft Corporation India Ltd. [2011] 9 taxmann.com 253 (Delhi) has quashed the assessment proceedings. He has placed before us a copy of the said decision and a copy was also given to Ld. DR. 5. On the other hand, Ld. DR relied upon the order of Assessing Officer and CIT(A) and contended that the assessee failed to pay the correct rate of tax, hence, the Assessing Officer was right in invoking the re-assessment proceedings and the order of the Assessing Officer has rightly been upheld by the CIT(A). Therefore, the appeals filed by the assessee should be dismissed. 6. We have carefully considered the rival submissions. These appeals have been heard on the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t under section 143(3) was framed vide order dated 30-3-2005 and the copy of such order is placed at pages 49 and 50 of the paper book. Similarly, for assessment year 2003-04, the assessment was framed under section 143(3) vide order dated 31-3-2006 and copy of such order is placed at page 97 of the paper book. It is also not the case of the department that re-assessment is initiated for the reason of non-furnishing of return under section 139 or non-furnishing of return in response to notice issued under sub-section (1) of section 142 or under section 148. Therefore, the only issue remained to be examined for applicability of proviso is that whether there is any failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for its assessment. For that firstly we have to examine whether or not any such allegation is made by the Assessing Officer in the reasons recorded by him for the respective assessment years. For that purpose, it will be relevant to reproduce the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer for exercising powers of reassessment. The reasons for assessment year 2002-03 are reproduced below:- "Reasons recorded for issue of notice und....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d the Act, it was held in the assessment order for assessment year 2006-07, that the income of the assessee with regard to the Projects, where contract entered before 1-4-2004, no deduction for the expenses are allowable and the assessee is liable to pay tax in India as per section 44D read with section 115A of the Act and with regard to the Projects, where contract entered after 1-4-2004, the provisions of section 44DA of the Act will apply. In view of the above, and the fact that the tax on the income of the assessee from Srinagar-Nagpur Project has been wrongly computed and surcharge and cess (as applicable) for the year has also not been charged, I have reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for assessment year 2002-03 as per clause (c)(ii) of Explanation 2 to section 147 of the Act. Considering the findings of the assessment order passed for 2006-07, I believe that income chargeable to tax, which has escaped assessment amounts to or is likely to more than Rs. 1 lakh for the year. In this case not more than 6 years have lapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year (2002-03) and income of more than Rs. 1 lakh has escaped assessment, t....