AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (5) TMI 963
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....No. 10CCB, the date of commencement of operation by the industrial unit was 2500302004 and the deduction has been claimed from the assessment year 2005-06 being the initial assessment year. Perusal of F No. 10CCB as well as audited statement of accounts shown that total sales/ turnover of the undertaking for the period ended on 31-03-2014 reported at Rs.6,60,72,210/- and corresponding profit & gains from eligible business ascertained at Rs.47,15,369/- for the period under consideration." 3. Accordingly, in the computation of income, the deduction under Chapter-VIA, Section 80-IC to the extent of Rs.47,15,309/- was assessed under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 4. Thereafter, in respect of the assessment year 2014-15, the Income Tax Officer, Ward-I, Tinsukia issued a notice dated 01.01.2019 to the petitioner company under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 intending to re-assess the income/ loss in respect of the said assessment year 2014-15 on the ground that the said authority had reasons to believe that the income of the petitioner company, chargeable to income tax, had escaped the assessment within the meaning of Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. I....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sure to himself that the assessee has not understated his income or has not under-paid tax in any manner. It has been mentioned in the said order that the petitioner was asked to produce books of accounts and other details/ particulars. The order also reflects that in response to the notice under Section 143(2), the petitioner company's Chartered Accountant and the Accountant - cum- authorised representative had attended the hearing and filed the ITR-V. , bank statement, etc. auditor's report, etc. A part of the said order, whereby the deduction was allowed, has already been referred to herein before. 8. Thus, when an assessment is made by taking recourse to Section 143(2) and 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, it cannot be open to the Income Tax Officer, Ward-I, Tinsukia to project that income had escaped assessment. The contents of the assessment order dated 30.09.2016 clearly discloses that as the deduction claimed by the petitioner under Section 80-IC was found questionable, by issuing notice under Section 143(2), the Income Tax Officer, Ward-I, Tinsukia had applied his mind on the defence taken by the petitioner and accepted the deduction claimed to be admissible a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on 149 was substituted by the Finance Act, 2021. 14. The said provision of Section 149 as it stood prior to its substitution by Finance Act, 2021 is quoted below:- "149. Time limit for notice. - (1) No notice under section 148 shall be issued for the relevant assessment year- (a) if four years have elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year, unless the case falls under clause (b) or clause (c); (b) if four years, but not more than six years, have elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year unless the income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment amounts to or is likely to amount to one lakh rupees or more for that year. (c) if four years, but not more than sixteen years, have elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year unless the income in relation to any asset (including financial interest in any entity) located outside India, chargeable to tax, has escaped assessment. Explanation. In determining income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment shall for the purposes of this sub-section, the provisions of Explanation 2 of section 147 apply as they apply for the purposes of that section. (2) Th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....come Tax Act, 1961, by necessary implication, the "Additional Commissioner of Income Tax" would not be same as "Principal Chief Commissioner" or "Chief Commissioner" or "Principal Commissioner" or "Commissioner" of Income Tax. Therefore, on the ground that the Income Tax Officer, Ward-I, Tinsukia had obtained satisfaction of Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, an authority who is not covered by the provision of Section 151(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as it stood on 01.01.2019, the proceeding initiated against the petitioner company by issuance of notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is held to be not in accordance with law. 17. The gist of the decision in the case of G.K.N. Driveshafts (supra) has been provided in para 7 of the affidavit-in-opposition. In this case, the petitioner has responded to the notice under section 148. Therefore, it does not appear that the guidelines referred to in para 7 of the affidavit-in-opposition was not adhered to by the petitioner. Therefore, the said case would not help the respondent nos. 2, 3 and 4. 18. Therefore, in light of the discussions above, the proceeding initiated against the petitioner company under Section....