TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (12) TMI 1589
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing the petitioner, at the very outset, has drawn the attention of this Court to the notice issued under Section 148A(1) of the said Act dated 11th March, 2025 and would submit that such notice was based on information which had been uploaded in the Insight Portal of the Income Tax Department, wherefrom it has been deduced that the income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment in respect of the financial transactions made by the assessee to the tune of Rs. 383,56,66,066/- concerning a cash purchase of coal from Majee Group amounting to Rs. 2,45,00,000/- and the information uploaded in the taxpayer annual summary (TAS) report amounting to Rs. 381,11,66,066/-. Along with the above show-cause, the entire documents received from the investigation had been enclosed. Mr. Mazumdar has also drawn the attention of this Court to an information being F. No. ADIT (Inv.), Unit-2(4), Kolkata dated 24th February, 2022, addressed to the assessing officer of the petitioner. By identifying the transactions appearing at pages 107 and 108 of the writ petition, Mr. Mazumdar would submit that nine (9) several transactions for the relevant assessment year have been identified, and it has been alleged t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....gations had been levelled though, the same could not be substantiated. On the issue of TAS report, it was stated that all the transactions as are reported in TAS report are part of regular books of accounts and as such the same cannot be said to be an income escaping assessment and as such the proceeding should be dropped. 4. By referring to the order issued under Section 148A(3) of the said Act dated 26th June, 2025, it is submitted that although, the assessing officer in paragraph 7 of the above order had recorded that in respect of the assessment year 2018-19, the case was re-opened by issuing a notice under Section 148 of the said Act and in such re-assessment proceedings the transactions made with Majee Group had been considered in the hands of the assessee for the assessment year 2018-19, this, according to Mr. Mazumdar, is a fraud practice by the assessing officer. He has stated that the assessing officer had suppressed available information to substantiate his contention. Mr. Majumdar has however, relied on the entirety of the assessment order, which has been disclosed in the petition. According to him, the claim made by the assessing officer in such case pertaining to t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the petitioner, the transactions which have been noted and formed part of the show cause under section 148A(1) of the said Act were under scrutiny, the petitioner was called upon to explain the series of cash payments made to Majee Group, Salt Lake. Records would reveal that in response to the aforesaid notice, the petitioner had categorically contended that the allegations made in such notice dated 15th November, 2022 was unfounded and it was submitted that it was not aware of any Majee Group. 8. From the above, it is apparent that the entirety of the allegations has been denied by the petitioner. Following the aforesaid, the jurisdictional assessing officer had passed an order under Section 143(3) of the said Act read with Section 144B thereof, dated 22nd December, 2022. On the aspect of the petitioner transacting with Majee Group, the assessing officer had noted as follows: "Summary of information/evidence collected which proposed to be used against it (attach documents if required) :- On the issue of information available, that M/s Marks Steel Ltd., (PAN-AACCM8187B) has made cumulative cash payment of Rs.2,45,00,000/- on various dates to M/s Majee Group in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rport of Section 34 of the Income Tax Act, 1922 and highlighted two conditions which would have to be satisfied before issuing a notice to reopen an assessment beyond four years but within eight years (as was the then limitation). The first condition was that the Income Tax Officer must have reason to believe that income, profits or gains chargeable to income tax had been under-assessed. The second condition was that he must have also reason to believe that such under-assessment had occurred by reason of either : (i) omission or failure on the part of the assessee to make a return of his income under Section 22, or (ii) omission or failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for his assessment for that year. It was emphasised that both these were conditions precedent to be satisfied before the Income Tax Officer could have jurisdiction to issue a notice for the assessment or reassessment beyond the period of four years but within the period of eight years from the end of the year in question. The words used in the expression "omission or failure to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for h....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....I find that for a case of change of opinion to be established an assessing officer must arrive at an opinion that there has been no escapement of income on the ground noted therein. Admittedly, in this case, I find that the transactions of the petitioner with Majee Group had been considered by the jurisdictional assessing officer. However, I find that the jurisdictional assessing officer was unable to form an opinion in the said case in absence of data and as such was not in a position to verify whether the parties have any business relationship. It is on such ground, the issue was dropped. The above, in my view, would not constitute formation of an opinion by the jurisdictional assessing officer. It is well settled that reassessment of income under Section 148 of the said Act cannot be made on the basis of a change of opinion. If the assessing officer had earlier made an assessment for a relevant assessment year expressing an opinion on the matter either expressly or by necessary implication, a reassessment proceeding for alleged escapement of income from assessment of tax cannot be initiated, as it would be a case of change of opinion. If such order is non-speaking, cryptic, it m....