2015 (10) TMI 261

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ng rectification, which was allowed by the Assessing Officer, by an order dated 05.03.2010 after verifying the records. This is where the matter rested for more than four years when the impugned notice under Section 148 was issued on 28.03.2013. The reasons for invoking Section 147 of the said Act were supplied to the petitioner and to which the petitioner filed its objections on 07.01.2014. Thereafter, the impugned order dated 18.02.2014 was passed by the Assessing Officer rejecting the objections. 3. The purported reasons, which were supplied to the petitioner for the belief that the income has escaped assessment, were as under:- "The original assessment u/s 143(3) was completed after scrutiny in December 2009, at 18712850/-u/s 143(3) as against the returned loss of Rs. (-) 9082195/-, and further assessed at Nil by way of rectification by order dated 05/03/2010. Perusal of records revealed that:- 1. The assessee had debited Rs. 27637716/- to the P&L account on account of provision for obsolete. As the provision made was not an ascertained liability, it should have been disallowed and added back to the total income of the assessee. The assessee has not done so. There is mista....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....IT Act, 1961 and 4 years have since elapsed. The assessment record is being submitted for kind perusal and approval u/s 151(1) of the IT Act, 1961 for issuance of notice u/s 148 of the IT Act, 1961." 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the notice under Section 148 of the said Act and the proposed re-assessment of income in respect of the assessment year 2006-07 was bad in law because there was no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose particulars which were material for its assessment which was a requirement of the first proviso to Section 147 of the said Act. It was also pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the reasons were also based on mere change of opinion. All the four points, which were raised in the 'reasons', were considered by the Assessing Officer at the time of the original assessment. 5. The learned counsel for the respondent/revenue supported the re-assessment proceedings as also the order dated 18.02.2014 and submitted that the petitioner's case was validly taken up for re-assessment because of failure on the part of the assessee to fully and truly disclose all the particular materials for its assessment. 6. Afte....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... forward losses of the Pune unit. First of all, we agree with the learned counsel for the petitioner that this is factually incorrect. The losses of the 100% EOU undertaking at Pune had not been set off against the income of the trading unit at Delhi. Furthermore, the questionnaire which was given to the assessee at the time of the original assessment sought for details of brought forward losses etc. as per question No.14 thereof. The said question No. 14 reads as under:- "14. Details of b/f assessed losses and unabsorbed depreciation longwith evidence. Also give the same details in respect of b/f book losses and unabsorbed depreciation." 9. The reply to this was given by the assessee in the following manner:- "Point No.14: Regarding brought forward losses/deprecation allowance, your kind attention is drawn to Schedule X of the Tax Audit Report for AY 2006-07 filed by the assessee with your goodself." 10. A reference was made to Schedule X of the Tax Audit Report for the assessment year 2006-07 which was already with the Assessing Officer where all the necessary details were provided. Furthermore, it may be recalled that the assessee had sought rectification under Section 154....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....disclose full particulars with regard to its assessment of income. We agree with the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner on this aspect also. 13. Lastly, the fourth reason was with regard to goods in transit as also stores and spares of the amount of Rs. 1,77,53,040/- and Rs. 14,43,503/- respectively. In this connection also, we find that the details of the stock had been given by the assessee at the time of the original assessment and particularly, in response to the questionnaire that the Assessing Officer had handed over to the assessee. The details given to the Assessing Officer at that time were, inter alia, has under:- "Swarovski India Private Limited Assessment Year: 2006-07 Details of Valuation of Stock as on 31.03.2006 SR. No DESCRIPTION Total Value Delhi Pune 1 Raw Material 13,351,037.00 10,912,162 2,438,875 2 PACKING MATERIAL 2,687,740.00 2,687,740 3 WIP 745,532.00 745,532 4 Finished Goods 3795050 928,196 2,866,854 5 Traded Goods 76468791 76,468,79 6 Goods in Transit 17753040 17,753,040 7 Stores and Spares 1443503 1,443,503   Grand Total 116,244,693 106,062,189 10,182,504 "     14. It is evident from ....