TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (9) TMI 669
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... affidavit-in-opposition. Referring to the reasons for invocation of the provision of Section 148 of the Act of 1961, as supplied by the department, he submits that, none of the reasons given by the department would withstand judicial scrutiny. The first ground is with regard to the return to certificate holders and the treatment of the account in relation thereto. He submits that, the detail with regard to return to certificate holders were disclosed in the annual balance sheet of the petitioner. He draws the attention of the Court to the balance sheet as at March 31, 1999 and the notes on account appended thereto which forms the part of the balance sheet. He submits that, the balance sheet together with the notes which are an integral part of such balance sheet were placed before the assessing officer for his consideration. He refers to the assessment order for the assessment year 1999-2000 and submits that, such head was looked into and considered by the assessing officer. In fact, queries were raised with regard to such head in the assessment proceeding. The petitioner replied thereto. He draws the attention of the Court to the notice under Section 148(1) of the Act, 1961 is....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ficer at the time of assessment. He refers to the queries raised by the assessing officer at the material point of time and the reply given thereto. In addition, he refers to the letter dated January 17, 2002 issued by the assessee. Referring to the fourth ground appearing from the reasons supplied by the department for invoking Section 148 of the Act of 1961, learned senior advocate for the petitioner submits that, the assessee made a claim for deferred obligation which was disallowed in its entirety by the assessing officer in his order of assessment. Therefore, the authorities are guilty of non-application of mind in putting in such ground in the reasons for invoking Section 148 of the Act of 1961. Learned senior advocate for the petitioner refers to AIR 1961 SC 372 (Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd. vs. Income-tax Officer, Companies District I, Calcutta & Anr.), 320 ITR 561 (SC) (Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd.) and an unreported decision of the Supreme Court dated December 8, 2016 passed in Civil Appeal No. 11189 of 2016 (Jeans Knit Pvt. Ltd. Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Bangalore, and Ors.) in support of the proposition that, the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Tax Act, 1961 upon the petitioner. The petitioner is not aware of an order of reassessment. In such circumstances, he submits that the impugned notice under Section 148, and the reasons given in respect thereof along with the disposal of the objection raised dated September 29, 2006 be quashed. Learned advocate for the department submits that, notice under Section 148 of the Act of 1961 was issued after obtaining the prior approval of the appropriate authority. In this regard, he relies upon the original records produced in Court. Learned senior advocate for the petitioner is allowed to look into such record as produced by the department. Learned advocate appearing for the department submits that, the petitioner had participated in the process of adjudication of the objection raised to the invocation of Section 148 of the Act of 1961. The impugned order dated September 22, 2006 is well reasoned. It does not require any interference by the Writ Court. He contends that, it cannot be said or alleged that, the assessing officer had acted with an inherent lack of jurisdiction in an invocation of Section 148 of the Act of 1961 or in passing the impugned order dated June 22, 2006. H....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on-disclosure of material fact, it is of the view that, the assessee has a duty to disclosing all material facts relevant to the decision in respect of the questions before the assessing officer. Simplicitor producing the account books and evidence before the assessing officer will not suffice. The assessee owes the duty to bring to the attention of the assessing authorities the requisite particulars in the books of account or the particular portions of the document which are relevant. Failure to discharge such duty would amount to omission to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for the assessment. Jeans Knit Pvt. Ltd. (supra) notices Calcutta Discount Pvt. Ltd. (supra) and is of the view that, the rigors laid down in Calcutta Discount (supra) were not adhered to, in the facts of that case. Kelvinator of India Ltd. (supra) is of the view that, it is not permissible to reopen an order of assessment on the basis of change of opinion by the assessing officer. It notices the conceptual difference between the power to review and the power to reassess. It is of the view that the assessing officer has no power to review ; he has the power to reassess. However, the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., in view of the fact that, if Section 148 is allowed to continue, it may result in conflict in decision between the assessing officer and the appellate authority on the same head, it would be appropriate to hold that the invocation of Section 148 for the same is improper. . Therefore the reasons for invocation of Section 148 of the act of 1961 on the second ground also fails. The third ground is the treatment of the suspense account. The claim made on this head was disallowed by the assessing officer to the extent of 50%. Again the assessing officer before passing the order of assessment had called upon the petitioner to furnish information with regard thereto. The petitioner had furnished such information in its reply. In addition, the petitioner had written a letter dated January 17, 2002 to the assessing officer. In such factual matrix it cannot be said that, the department has any new tangible material to hold that the petitioner did not make a true and faithful disclosure in its account before the assessing officer. The fourth ground for reopening as given in the reasons is deferred obligation. Claim as an expenditure made on this account before the assessing officer wa....