Just a moment...

Top
Help
AI Drafter

Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.

Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review

The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.

• Review the issues identified by the AI
• Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required


Step 2 – Draft Generation

Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.

• Relevant statutory provisions
• Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations
• Issue-wise legal analysis
• Practical arguments and supporting content
• Professionally structured draft ready for further review.

Try Now
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2020 (5) TMI 91

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hmedabad, Bench 'A' (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal") in ITA No.2637/Ahd/2014 for assessment year 2006-07 by proposing the following two questions stated to be substantial questions of law:- "[A] Whether the Appellate Tribunal has erred in law and on facts in holding that the reopening of assessment u/s 147 was not justified and requires to be quashed? [B] Whether the Appellate Tribunal has erred in law and on facts in holding that the question of treating the amount of Rs. 159.46 Cr credited directly to Capital reserve account without crediting to the P & L account as cessation of liability u/s 41(1) of the Act, which was not dealt with in the original assessment proceedings does not constitute "information" wit....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Tribunal has inter alia held that the Assessing Officer was not able to lay his hands on any new information and has only re-appreciated the information already possessed by him and considered in the scrutiny assessment and that there is no allegation against the assessee of withholding any information. Reference was made to Explanation 1 to section 147 of the Act, which provides that production before the Assessing Officer of account books or other evidence from which material evidence could with due diligence have been discovered by the Assessing Officer will not necessarily amount to disclosure within the meaning of the foregoing proviso. It was submitted that therefore, merely because the Assessing Officer has placed reliance upon t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....utstanding of Rs. 43.14 crores. The Corporation thus got remission of Rs. 159.05 crores in principal outstanding of loan liabilities. The transaction between the Corporation and SIDBI and other banks are of the nature of loan transaction. These transactions are therefore on Capital Account. The waiver or remission of the liabilities towards loan is therefore of Capital Receipt and hence Corporation has therefore credited these amounts to Capital Reserve. The details of the principal loan amounts waived by SIDBI and other banks are given in Annexure-B." 8. Thus, it is evident that the issue proposed vide question [B] had been scrutinized at the time of the original scrutiny assessment under section 143(3) of the Act. Subsequently....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ing the assessment, the assumption of jurisdiction on the part of the Assessing Officer, beyond a period of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, lacked validity. Under the circumstances, no infirmity can be found in the impugned order so as to give rise to any question of law, much less, a substantial question of law. 10. Insofar as the finding recorded by the Tribunal that the Assessing Officer could not lay his hands on any new information and has re-appreciated the information already possessed by him and considered it in the scrutiny assessment, as rightly pointed out by the learned senior standing counsel for the appellant, in the light of the provisions of Explanation 1 to section 147 of the Act, there is no bar....