TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1990 (3) TMI 47
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f donation of Rs. 12,00,000 paid to K. M. Scientific Research Centre, an institution then approved under that section by the prescribed authority. The said approval, it appears, was withdrawn by the prescribed authority by a notification dated January 2, 1986, with retrospective effect. It further appears that, on the basis of this information, the Income-tax Officer is stated to have formed the belief that the petitioners' income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment and issued the impugned notice under section 148/147(b) requiring the petitioners to file their return of income for the assessment year 1982-83. The pertinent question is whether this information which is, of course, subsequent to the completion of assessment constitutes ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the light of the above decision. No doubt, so far as that decision is concerned, the question was whether the material had a direct nexus or a live link with the formation of the belief. And, in this case, the question posed is whether the material (in this case the subsequent notification) was apparently invalid and unreliable. However, to my mind, there is no material difference in the situation particularly as the petition has already been admitted. If the petitioner can show that the information is not worth placing reliance on the face of it, it may be open to him to contend that formation of belief that income had escaped assessment was without justification. In this context, it is necessary to bear in section 35 (1) as it then stoo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sapprove or refuse to approve by necessary implication. But the further question is about its doing so with retrospective effect. Section 295(4) of the Act, no doubt, empowers the Board (C. B. D. T.) to make rules with retrospective effect. Even there, the rules can be amended retrospectively but not to the prejudice of the assessees. That apart, that is in connection with the power to make rules as distinct from the power to issue notifications and that too not by the Board but by the prescribed authority other than the Board. Under the circumstances, it has to be held that the information in the form of retrospective cancellation of the approval of the concerned institution as an agricultural institute within the meaning of section 35(1)(....