TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (7) TMI 138
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ies, the matter is taken up for final disposal. 2. The petitioner, who is engaged in the business of processing and trading of yarn, has challenged the Notice dated 27.03.2019 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act') for Assessment Year (for short 'A.Y.') 2012-13 and the order dated 16.10.2019, disposing of the objections raised by the petitioner against the show cause notice. 3. The issue raised in the present writ-petition is in narrow compass. The petitioner filed the return of income on 28.09.2012 for A.Y. 2012-13 declaring total income of Rs. 50,93,730/-. The case of the petitioner was selected for scrutiny assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act, and accordingly, Notice under Section 143(2) o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d to the said notice by filing appropriate reply on 08.04.2019. 3.5. The petitioner-Company raised its objection against the reasons recorded in the letter dated 21.09.2019, however, the respondent rejected the objection vide order dated 16.10.2019 and being aggrieved with the reopening of the assessment, the petitioner has challenged such action by way of the present writ-petition. 4. Learned advocate Mr. Manish Shah, at the outset, has submitted that the reopening of the assessment runs contrary to the proviso to Section-147 of the Act, since the reopening is premised after a period of four years which is only permissible in case, the assessee has failed to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment. 4.1....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....was passed. 4.3. It is thus submitted that in these circumstances, it cannot be said that income has escaped assessment, for the reason that the petitioner did not fully disclose any tangible material or any information has been suppressed by it. Thus, it is contended that the reopening is hit by the limitation period of four years, as per the proviso to Section-147(1) of the Act. Hence, the Notice under Section 148 is required to be quashed. 4.4. In support of his submission, learned advocate Mr. Shah has placed reliance on the judgment of the Coordinate Bench in the case of Mihir Textiles Limited vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, (2010) 43 DTR 11 (Guj). [Special Civil Application No. 5825 of 2000, dated 09.02.2010]. 5. Opposi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....relied on the material available on record in the original scrutiny proceedings without appreciating that the petitioner has not disclosed the relevant information and without appreciating that the Assessing Officer has not raised any query on the issue of claiming the depreciation by changing in the methodology from SLM to WDV method. 6. We have heard the learned advocates at length. The facts which are established from record and pleadings are that the petitioner company declared its total income of Rs. 50,93,730/- for A.Y. 2012-13 in the return of income dated 28.09.2012. The same was selected for scrutiny assessment under the provision of Section-143(3) of the Act. The petitioner was called upon by the concerned Assessing Officer to ....