TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (7) TMI 814
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....1 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short "IT Act") and the impugned order dated 24th January 2022 disposing of the objections filed to reopening the assessment of the Petitioner. The Assessment Year in question is A.Y. 2014-2015. 3. One of the main grounds for challenging reopening is that the Assessing Officer could never have reason to believe that the income of the Petitioner had escaped assessment. The reasons for re-opening the assessment can be found from pages 67 to 69 of the paperbook. The reasons given are that the Assessing Officer had received information from DCIT (International Taxation), Mumbai, that proceedings under Section 133(6) of the IT Act in the case of M/s. Tail Winds Ltd. are currently und....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Rs.3563.49 Crores in A.Y. 2014-2015, the nature and source of which was not reflected from the Return of Income filed by the Assessee (the Petitioner). The reasons record that having gone through the findings as well as the records, these facts were not disclosed by the Assessee in its original Return of Income, and the Assessing Officer, therefore, came to the conclusion that the Assessee had not disclosed fully and truly all the material facts in the Return filed. The Assessing Officer, therefore, held that he had reason to believe that income chargeable to tax amounting to the sum of Rs.3563.49 Crores had escaped assessment within the meaning of Section 147 of the IT Act. 5. In reply to the reasons, the Petitioner filed its objections....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t Airways (India) Ltd., by M/s. Tail Winds Ltd. The dividend received by the Petitioner was higher than the purchase consideration paid by the Assessee since the other shares of Jet Airways (India) Ltd. [which were not purchased by the Assessee], were sold to the public, namely 1,11,43,535 shares. Thus, the surplus dividend available to the Assessee was approximately USD 60 Million, and accordingly, no loan was taken to fund the purchase of the third tranche of shares of Jet Airways (India) Ltd. 6. These objections were rejected by the Assessing Officer vide his order dated 24th January 2022 (pages 101 to 107 of the paperbook). By relying upon several decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court as well as different High Courts, the Assessing ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f funds from which he purchased the Jet Airways (India) Ltd. shares, and coupled with the fact that he is a non-resident, the amount expended to purchase the aforesaid shares could not be brought to tax in India. 8. In this factual backdrop, Mr. Pardiwalla, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioner, submitted that once all this material was before the Assessing Officer, he could not have had reason to believe that the income had escaped assessment. He submitted that since this proof has been given after the order disposing of the objections, the Assessing Officer be directed to take all this material into consideration and thereafter pass a fresh order. He submitted that this is more so in the facts of the present case beca....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er has filed his response to the notice issued under Section 143(2) as well as the notice issued under Section 142(1), the Petitioner should approach the Assessing Officer and establish his claim in the assessment proceedings itself. If what the Petitioner contends is correct, then no addition would be made in his income in the reassessment proceedings. Consequently, he submitted that this was not a fit case where the Writ Petition ought to be entertained. 10. We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties at length. We have also perused the papers and proceedings in the present Writ Petition. 11. The main ground of challenge in the present Writ Petition is that the Assessing Officer could never have reason to believe that income h....