1987 (12) TMI 75

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... CIT(A) should be annulled. 2. The learned Counsel for the assessee contended that all material facts necessary for purposes of making assessments were disclosed to the IAC (Assst). At the time of making the original assessments. He therefore could not assume the jurisdiction under s. 147 (a) he further contended that he had no subsequent information for reopening the assessments even under s. 147(b) The learned Departmental Representative on the other hand contended that the jurisdiction had rightly been assumed by the ITO under s. 147 as the assessee had failed to disclose in the return of total income as required under s. 34 (1) of the IT Act, 1961 the particulars of assets on which triple shift depreciation allowance was claimed thou....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nstalled as on 31st March, 1978 relevant to the asst. yr. 1978-79 This statement was enclosed with the above letter. It gives details of the plant and machinery giving the particulars of machinery, name of the supplier, number of machines, bill No. etc. etc. He referred to item No. 10. of the list an pointed out that it was specifically mentioned therein that at the electric sub station one transformer was installed which was supplied by M/s Siemens India Ltd. Again he referred to item No. 13. Of the list where two numbers of air conditioners purchased from M\s Voltas Ltd. are mentioned. It was also stated that this information was furnished to the Assessing Officer in response to her latter dt. 5th Aug., 1980 and the Assessing Officer had ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ems was also filed with the assessees letter dt. 20th\21st Feb., 1981 a copy of which has been filed in the paper book This information was also not controverted on behalf of the Revenue. That being so, we are in complete agreement with the submissions made on behalf of the assessee that there was no omission or failure on the part of the assessee that there was no to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for its assessments. The Assessing Officer, therefore, had no jurisdiction to reopen the assessments under s. 147(a). We also notice that no new information was gathered by the Assessing Officer during the course of assessment proceedings for the asst. yr. 1980-81. Such information was already available on the file for the ....