TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (7) TMI 174
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....9;s objection to reopen the assessee's assessment for the Assessment Year 2005-2006. 2. On 30.10.2005 the petitioner filed its return on income tax for assessment year 2005-06 declaring total income as Rs. 52.96 crores. The Assessing Officer after having issued notice under Section 143(2) of the Act passed an Assessment Order dated 28.3.2007 under Section 143(3) of the Act assessing the petitioner's income at Rs. 53.12 crores. 3. On 29.3.2012 the impugned notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued to the petitioner and the reasons for reopening the assessment beyond the end of four years from the relevant assessment year furnished to the petitioner reads as under:- "(i) It is seen that the assessee company is paying com....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....French Bridge. The details of payment to M/s.Bonas and Company is as under:- Name F.Y. 2004-05 (in Rs.) M/s.Bonas and Company 3,00,92,729/- Since the assessee company has made payment of commission to the foreign company having permanent establishment in India without deducting TDS, the same is disallowable in view of the provision of the section 40(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act,1961, which states as under:- "Section-40: Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in section 30 to 38, the following amounts shall not be deducted in computing the income chargeable under the head "profits and gains of business or profession', - (a) in the case of any assessee- (i) any interest (not being interest on a loan i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....25.10.2012, the Assessing Officer rejected the petitioner's objection to the reasons for reopening the assessment furnished to them. In the order rejecting the objections, it is recorded that M/s.Bonas & Company Ltd. has an office in Mumbai. 6. The grievance of the petitioner as expounded by Mr.Pardiwala, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner is that the assessment being sought to be reopened is beyond the period of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year 2005-06. Therefore, it is submitted that conditions precedent to exercise jurisdiction is that there must be reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped the assessment, and such escapement must arise from failure to fully and truly disclose the ma....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... produced any evidence which it now seeks to produce before us. This is best determined by the authorities under the Act. In any case, the reasons recorded for issuing the impugned notice specifically points out that commission paid to M/s.Bonas & Co.Ltd. (a foreign party) is not shown separately but added to the cost of purchase while commission paid on local purchase has been separately shown in the profit and loss account and not added to costs. Thus, there has been less then full and true disclosure of all material facts during the assessment proceedings for Assessment Year 2005-06. This is for reason that if the commission paid to the foreign party was shown separately as in case of local purchase, the question of tax deduction at sour....