TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1998 (6) TMI 8
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d to quash the same. In support of the writ petitions, the petitioner herein has filed separate affidavits wherein he has narrated all the facts and circumstances that forced him to file these writ petitions and prayed that his writ petitions may be allowed as prayed for. Though no counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent, they argued the matter. Heard the arguments advanced by learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and also that of learned senior counsel appearing for the Department. I have also gone through the contents of the affidavit filed by the petitioner and also all the necessary material documents available on record in the form of typed set of papers. I have also taken into consideration the various points raise....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... assessment by orders of assessment dated May 26, 1982, for both the years. While the assessments had thus become final and tax due pursuant to the assessment had also been paid, the petitioner received a letter from the respondent dated March 2, 1989, stating that regarding the two credits referred to in the return filed by the petitioner, it was seen from the records that one Raghbir Singh had given the petitioner certain amounts and that therefore it was stated in the said letter that it was proposed to reopen his assessment for the year 1978-79 under section 147(a). A similar letter dated March 3, 1989, was received for the assessment year 1979-80. In the said notices it was stated that the petitioner has not given the full particulars,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the respondent has issued two notices, one dated March 29, 1989, for the year 1978-79 and another dated April 7, 1989, for the year 1979-80. In the notice for the year 1978-79, the respondent has stated that the notice was being issued after obtaining the necessary satisfaction of the Central Board of Direct Taxes, in C. No. 289/233/89-IT (Inv.II), dated March 28, 1989. There is no such noting in the notice dated April 7, 1989, relating to the year 1979-80. But the said notice is stated to have been issued, after obtaining the necessary satisfaction of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Central-I. Therefore, it is stated by the petitioner that the aforesaid notices proposing to reopen the assessments for the years 1978-79 and 1979-80 are total....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... been furnished. Obviously it is on the basis of this averment alone that the approval of the Board for the reopening of the assessment appears to have been obtained on March 28, 1989, in respect of the assessment year 1978-79 and the approval of the Commissioner obtained in respect of the year. Therefore, in the above circumstances, the proposed reopening is totally illegal, violative of the provisions of the Act and without jurisdiction and the reopening proceedings pursuant to the notice under section 148 are liable to be quashed. Hence, these writ petitions. Having seen the entire documents available on record, the following are the admitted facts in this case. The petitioner herein is an income-tax assessee and be submitted his return....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cie the petitioner has not given full particulars, i.e., full address of the creditors. The same reason is adduced for reopening the assessment for the year 1979-80. It is also significant to note that there is not even an allegation that these credits are not genuine or that income has escaped assessment. Apart from that even in the detailed letter preceding the issue of the printed notice, the respondent has not even alleged that there has been escapement of income. Even while calling for an objection to the proposed reopening of the assessment, the only averment is that there are certain credits and the full particulars of the creditors have not been furnished. But from the records it is seen that even the income-tax assessment proceedin....