2003 (12) TMI 31

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t years 1996-97 and 1997-98. The petitioner is engaged in the business of manufacture of various abrasives. In the returns of income filed for the respective assessment years, the petitioner had claimed relief under sections 80-I and 80-IA of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called as "the said Act"). During the course of the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer issued notices under section 143(2) of the said Act calling upon the petitioner to give further particulars regarding the claim filed under sections 80-I and 80-IA of the said Act. The assessee from time to time furnished the particulars and in the note relating to bond plant (page 65 of the petition), it was submitted that the assessee had started the bond plant in....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... assessee, this is the price which the said product would cost." Accordingly, the assessee submitted before the Assessing Officer that it has rightly considered the import/export price as the market value of the bonds manufactured in the bond plant. The Assessing Officer being satisfied with the explanation given by the assessee, passed the assessment order granting relief under section 80-IA of the said Act as claimed by the assessee. After a lapse of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, the impugned notices dated March 25, 2003, were issued under section 148 of the said Act seeking to reopen the assessment for the assessment years 1996-97 and 1997-98. Challenging the said notices, the present petition is filed. D....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the Assessing Officer and make submissions regarding the issuance of show cause notice, and only after the Assessing Officer passes a speaking order regarding the objection raised by the assessee, could a writ petition be filed if at all the assessee is aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer. Mr. Desai further submitted that from the reasons recorded for reopening of the assessment, it is clear that in the relevant assessment years, the assessee had failed to disclose material facts as a result, income liable to tax has escaped assessment and, accordingly, the Assessing Officer was justified in reopening the assessment. Thus, it was submitted that no interference is called for in the writ jurisdiction under article 226 of the Const....