AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (12) TMI 1196
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ent years, both these petitions are heard, decided and disposed of by this common judgment and order. [2.0] Special Civil Application No.9652/2010 has been preferred by the petitioner - assessee for an appropriate writ, direction and order to quash and set aside the impugned notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "IT Act"), by which the Assessing Officer has sought to reopen the assessment for AY 200304 in exercise of powers under Section 147 of the IT Act. [2.1] Special Civil Application No.9653/2010 has been preferred by the petitioner - assessee for an appropriate writ, direction and order to quash and set aside the impugned notice under Section 148 of the IT Act, by which the Assessing Off....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is case the assessment u/s. 143(3) was passed determining the deficit at Rs. 43,82,01,007/. The gross receipt is Rs. 74,85,55,395/and the assessee has claimed expenses as deduction u/s.11 of Rs. 118,67,57,504/. The deduction u/s.11 allowed includes capital expenses and revenue expenditure. The DIT(E) Ahmedabad has vide order No.DIT(E)/12AA/386/200910 dated 15/02/2010 withdrawn the registration u/s.12A(a) of the Act with effect from 01.04.2002. The assessee is therefore not entitled to deduction u/s.11 of the Act. The income of the assessee is to be computed in normal commercial manner. As the income has escaped assessment permission may be accorded to reopen the assessment u/s.148." Similar reasons recorded have been supplied to the peti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... therefore the condition precedent to assume the jurisdiction under Section 147 of the IT Act to reopen the assessment beyond the period of 4 years are required to be satisfied. It is submitted that as per proviso to Section 147 of the IT Act, unless and until it is alleged that there was any failure on the part of the assessee in not disclosing true and correct facts, there may not be any reassessment proceedings beyond the period of 4 years. [4.2] it is submitted that in the present case during the years under consideration i.e. AY 200304 and 200405 there was already a registration under Section 12A(a) of the IT Act in favour of the assessee and accordingly the assessee claimed the exemption under Section 11 of the IT Act, which came t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....i Bhatt, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the Revenue that as such against the order passed by the learned Tribunal in quashing and setting aside the order passed by the Director of Income Tax (Exemption) withdrawing the registration under Section 12A(a) of the It Act has been challenged by the Revenue by way of Tax Appeal, which is pending before this Court. It is submitted that therefore no error has been committed by the Assessing Officer in reopening the assessment for AY 200304 and 200405. [5.2] In the alternative it is submitted that if this Court is inclined to quash and set aside the impugned reassessment proceedings on the ground that the condition precedent for assuming jurisdiction under Section 147 of the IT Act are no....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in force. Considering the reasons recorded to reopen the assessment for AY 200304 and 200405, it appears that the assessment for AY 200304 and 200405 is sought to be reopened solely on the ground that subsequently in the year 2010, the registration under Section 12A(a) of the IT Act has been withdrawn retrospectively with effect from 01.04.200. Considering the fact that at the relevant time and during the years under consideration the registration under Section 12A(a) of the I.T. Act in favour of the petitioner - assessee was in force and in existence and accordingly the assessee claimed the deduction under Section 11 of the IT Act, which came to be granted / allowed by the Assessing Officer. Therefore it cannot be said that there was any ....