2013 (6) TMI 251

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....a writ petition on the premise that there was no    * Sysarris Software P. Ltd. v. Deputy CIT [2013] 352 ITR 443 (Karn).tangible or credible information with the Assessing Officer before issuing the notice under section 148 of the Act. Notice had been issued to the Revenue-respondents. The Revenue has produced records. The learned single judge examined the record, particularly the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer prior to issue of notice as contained in the record. The learned single judge rejected the contention on behalf of the assessee that it was a case of reopening without basis or material and, on the other hand, took the view that there was reasons recorded before reopening, but the adequacy of it or otherwis....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of the opinion that the pricing was not transparent, but because of mutual relationship and, therefore, formed the opinion that there is an escapement of the income for the assessment year 2006-07 also and proceeded to issue notice under section 148 of the Act. While Sri Chaithanya, learned counsel for the appellant, submits that the transaction and the report of the Transfer Pricing Officer for the other assessment year cannot be a basis for reopening of any concluded assessments of other years, this contention was subsequently rejected by the learned single judge on the premise that while the Assessing Officer had considered the manner of transaction for the earlier year, he has independently formed his opinion that there is an escape....