TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1973 (7) TMI 12
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... For the assessment year 1961-62, the said company was assessed under section 23(3) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as "the old Act") and the Income-tax Officer, "E" Ward, Companies Dist. III, computed the total income of the company at Rs. 70,692. The said assessment was, however, rectified subsequently by the said officer by his three orders dated 22nd March, 1962, 7th July, 1973, and the total income was finally computed at Rs. 41,519. The said company's assessment had been completed under the relevant provisions of the old Act and also under the new Income-tax Act, 1961, up to the assessment year 1965-66. While the assessment proceeding relating to the assessment years 1965-66 and 1966-67 were pending before....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....onditions precedent for assumption of jurisdiction under the provisions of section 147 of the new Act had not been satisfied and the Income-tax Officer had absolutely no materials on which he had reasons to believe that the respondent-company's income had escaped assessment and, as such, the said Income-tax Officer had no jurisdiction and/or authority to reopen the said assessment on a mere change of opinion. It was further contended that there was no new or fresh information in the possession of the said Income-tax Officer in consequence of which he had reasons to believe that the income of the respondent escaped assessment and that there was no omission on the part of the respondent-company to disclose fully and truly the material particu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....me a managing director in about a dozen limited companies along with "Oberois" is believed to have made some secret profits which were not offered for assessment. (2) The assessee is believed to have received a sum of Rs. 22 lakhs from "Oberois" and this sum or at least part of which represents income which has escaped assessment. The Supreme Court observed that it was abundantly clear that two reasons which were given for the belief which was formed by the Income-tax Officer hopelessly failed to satisfy the requirements of the statute. Now, in the instant case, the reasons recorded for the reopening for the assessment read as follows: "From the statement of accounts for the accounting period relevant to the assessment year unde....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....loan transactions that might be attributed to me and might be shown in any party's book as taken from me are bogus and in no instance had I lent any money against hundies. During the entire period 1952 or 1953 to 31st March, 1965, whatever hundi loan appeared in my name in any party at Calcutta, Delhi, Bombay or in any other place, these loans were not really loans and I acted merely as name-lender." In the balance-sheet which was submitted by the respondent it appears that material loans from sundry parties were shown as Rs. 3,50,000. The names of the parties from which these loans were taken have not been mentioned. It has not been stated in the affidavit filed by the department that the respondent-company took loan from the said Shri ....