TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2006 (9) TMI 87
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at Sumerpur. 3. On September 3, 1984 the Income Tax Officer passed assessment order under Section 143(3) of the Act for the assessment year 1984-85 assessing the total income of the assessee. 4. Thereafter a survey was conducted by the Income Tax Department on the business premises of the assessee on December 6, 1985 and certain documents and books were seized from the assessee's premises which were impounded under Section 131(3) of the Act and on basis of analysis of all those documents, the reassessment proceeding for assessment year 1984-85 was initiated by issuing notice under Section 148 on April 14, 1986. During the pendency of all these proceedings the amnesty scheme inviting the tax payers to clean their tax defaults with certain ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....disputably the position is that the impugned notice was issued on March 26, 1991 that is to say after the expiry of 4 years from the end of the assessment year 1984-85 in respect of which reassessment proceedings were sought to be initiated. 8. Apart from other contentions, the learned counsel for the petitioner has urged that this is a case of initiating reassessment proceedings after the assessment order under Section 143 (3) was made and after reassessment proceedings were initiated as a result of survey conducted at the business premises of the assessee and in terms of settlement proceedings under Amnesty Scheme another assessment was passed on agreed basis are no escapement of income has been attributed to any failure or omission on t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s have been initiated were in possession of the Assessing Officer himself since 1985. The omission or failure on the part of the assessee to disclose any facts truly or correctly on the basis of such documents cannot be attributed to the assessee as he was not in possession of those documents to make any submission on that behalf. He, therefore, contends that in the aforesaid circumstances, when the escapement of income, satisfaction about which even if held to be based on some material, but which failure is not attributable to omission or failure on the part of the assessee, the period of limitation for initiating the assessment proceedings is only four years from the end of expiry of the relevant assessment year which expired on March 31,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer immediately before issuance of the notice gives a peep in to the mind of the Assessing Officer as to the satisfaction reached by him and the belief entertained by him which gives him jurisdiction. 12. As the jurisdiction has been sought to be assumed for initiating the reassessment proceedings by the Assessing Officer on March 26, 1991. The provisions governing the power of assessing officer to initiate proceedings for reassessment existing on that date are the relevant provisions. Section 147 of the Act of 1961 which was substituted w.e.f. March 1, 1989 firstly lays down the condition when the Assessing Officer assumes jurisdiction : "If the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that any ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....all material facts necessary for his assessment for that assessment year." 14. Apparently, this embargo to proceed under Section 147 after expiry of 4 years is absolute where the escapement of income chargeable to tax from the assessment is not attributable to any default envisaged on the part of the assessee under the proviso where the previous assessment has taken place under Section 143 or 148. 15. As I have noticed above the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer goes to show that satisfaction of the Assessing Officer about escapement of income from the assessment has not been attributed to any default on the part of the assessee which is apparent from the relevant conclusion appearing from the reasons recorded by the Assessing Off....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....duty, however, extend beyond the full and truthful disclosure of all primary facts? In our opinion, the answer to this question must be in the negative. Once all the primary facts are before the assessing, he requires no further assistance by way of disclosure. It is for him to decide what inferences of facts can be reasonably drawn and what legal inferences have ultimately to be drawn. It is not for somebody else-far less the assessee—to tell the assessing authority what inferences, whether of facts or law, should be drawn." 19. Apparently, after examining all the papers particularly with respect to question of 'peak cash credit' during the previous year relevant assessment period 1984-85 was the matter of drawing inference from the doc....