AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2003 (2) TMI 14
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ell as the notice of hearing dated June 18, 2002, issued under section 143(2) of the Income-tax Act. The basic contention raised in this petition is that the notice under section 148 of the Income-tax Act issued for the assessment year 1994-95, beyond the period of four years from the end of the assessment year 1994-95, is without jurisdiction and hence is liable to be quashed and set aside. The facts having bearing on the subject matter of the present petition are as follows: The petitioner is a private limited company and is engaged in the business of providing consultancy services in the field of petroleum products to a Russian Government owned company. The petitioner is assessed as a company under the Income-tax Act. In the ass....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he payment is received beyond the period of six months, the assessee can be allowed such deduction only if the approval is obtained from the Chief Commissioner or the Commissioner, as the case may be. While giving effect to the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) dated November 28, 1997, the Assessing Officer noticed that even in earlier assessment years the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) had held that the amount received on account of technical services is liable to be taxed in the year in which it is received even though the services are rendered in earlier years. Accordingly, after verifying that the amounts were received within six months from the date of the issuance of the credit note, the Assessing Officer on M....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....has approached this court by filing the present writ petition. In the affidavit in reply, the respondents have disclosed the reasons for reopening the assessment. From the recorded reasons it is seen that the reopening of the assessment is solely on the ground that for the services rendered in the financial year 1990-91 deduction under section 80-O will not be available in the assessment year 1994-95 even though the amount was received in the assessment year 1994-95. It is further recorded by the Assessing Officer that by allowing deduction under section 80-O, the assessee has been given excess relief of Rs. 95,40,550 and hence the assessment is required to be reopened. Mr. Dastur, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the pet....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....any material to indicate failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts, notice issued beyond the period of four years from the end of the relevant assessment order is liable to be quashed and set aside. Mr. Desai, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the Revenue, on the other hand, submitted that there is inordinate delay on the part of the petitioners in approaching this court. Mr. Desai brought to our notice that the notice under section 148 of the Income-tax Act dated May 31,2001, was served upon the petitioner on June I, 2001, and notice for hearing under section 143(2) of the Income-tax Act was issued on June 18, 2002, and the petition has been filed belatedly on August 20, 2002, and in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....8 of the Income-tax Act and if the decision of the Assessing Officer is adverse, then the petitioner has statutory remedy of filing appeal, as provided under the Act. Accordingly, it was submitted that no interference is called for in a writ jurisdiction under article 226 of the Constitution of India. We have heard learned counsel on both the sides and perused the record placed before us, including the reasons recorded for reopening the assessment as well as the approval of the Commissioner of Income-tax for initiating action under section 148 of the Income-tax Act. There is no dispute that the original assessment order for the assessment year 1994-95 was passed under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act on March 27, 1997. Admittedly, th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nclusion that the amount for services rendered became payable only when the credit note was issued by the Russian agencies in Moscow. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) had directed the Assessing Officer to allow deduction under section 80-O only if the amount was brought to India within six months from the issuance of the credit note by the Russian Government. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer on verification had allowed the claim of the assessee. The Assessing Officer also noted that even in the assessment year 1989-90 the deduction under section 80-O was allowed on receipt basis irrespective of the year in which the service was rendered by the assessee. Under these circumstances, when the deduction under section 80-O was allowe....