2008 (10) 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

....01-2002, respectively. The assessee had filed returns for the aforesaid years which were processed under Section 143 (1) of the said Act. A survey operation was conducted under Section 133A of the said Act at the business premises of the assessee on 07.03.2002. At the time of survey it was found that the business premises were under renovation and that there was a discrepancy in the stocks. Proceedings under Section 147 of the said Act were initiated by the Assessing Officer after recording reasons under Section 148 (2) thereof. A notice under Section 148 (1) was issued on 15.05.2002. 2. The reasons, as recorded by the Assessing Officer under Section 148 (2) of the said Act, were as under:- '1. In this case survey u/s 133A o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ties, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the Assessing Officer was not justified in re-opening the assessments.  Consequently, the Tribunal did not consider it necessary to go into the merits with regard to the additions made by the Assessing Officer in respect of each of the three years in question. 4. The Tribunal noted that Section 147 of the said Act empowered the Assessing Officer to re-open assessments, provided he had reason to believe that any income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment for any of the assessment years in question. The Tribunal was of the view that a plain reading of Sections 147 and 148(2) made it clear that there must be some material in the possession of the Assessing Officer for coming to the co....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....conducted under Section 133 A in the business premises of the assessee on 07.03.2002, which falls within the financial year 2001-2002 relating to the assessment year 2002-2003. The years in question in the present appeals are assessment years 1999-2000, 2000-2001 and 2001-2002. It is obvious that the survey was not conducted in the years in question. In the said reasons, which have been recorded by the Assessing Officer, it is observed that in the course of the survey discrepancies in the stock were noticed and excess stock to the extent of Rs 5.55 lacs was found.  This excess stock is obviously relatable to the date on which the survey was conducted, that is, on 07.03.2002. On the basis of this fact, the Assessing Officer was of the v....