TMI Blog2014 (10) TMI 665X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f ₹ 11.04 crores and ₹ 15.10 crores on account of disallowance of deduction u/s 80 IA of the Act. There is statutory bar prohibiting the revenue from subjecting to tax income under regular assessment as the same has already been subjected to tax as block assessment under Chapter XVIB of the Act – the notices are clearly without jurisdiction and bad in law – relying upon CIT vs. H.N. Shindore [1976 (8) TMI 19 - BOMBAY High Court] – the notices were issued to the petitioner - the notices were more in the nature of protective assessments and would come to the aid of the revenue in case the block assessment orders are found not sustainable – thus, the issue of notices u/s 148 of the Act to safeguard against a future contingency i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sequent to the search a block assessment order relating to the period 1 April 1996 to 28 March 2002 was passed on 31 March 2004. In the block assessment order it was held that the petitioner is not entitled to deduction claimed under Section 80IA of the Act to the extent of ₹ 11.04 crores claimed for AY 1998-99. d) Thereafter, on 28 March 2005, the impugned notice seeking to reopen the assessment for AY 1998-99 was issued. In support of the impugned notice following reasons were furnished to the petitioner:- In this case the original assessment was completed under section 143(3) read with Section 147 of the I.T.Act, on assessed income of ₹ 86,45,780/-.On going through the records, it is seen that M/s. J.M. Essential Oil C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sel for the Petitioner and Mr. Suresh Kumar, learned Counsel for the respondent Revenue. 6. We find that the impugned notices dated 28 March 2005 and 3 February 2006 were issued almost one year and two years after 31 March 2004 when the block assessment order was passed. The reasons in support of the impugned notices very clearly states that basis of the impugned notice is the search conducted under Section 132 of the Act on 14 March 2002 upon the petitioner. The block assessment order passed on 31 March 2004 disallowed the petitioner's claim for deduction under Section 80IA for AY 1998-99 and 1999-2000 to the extent of ₹ 11.04 crores and ₹ 15.10 crores respectively. The impugned notices have been issued in respect of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... here is statutory bar prohibiting the respondent revenue from subjecting to tax income under regular assessment as the same has already been subjected to tax as block assessment under Chapter XVIB of the Act. 8. Therefore, on both the counts the impugned notices are clearly without jurisdiction and bad in law. 9. The view taken by us above is also supported by the decision of this Court in CIT vs. H.N. Shindore 113 ITR 679 wherein revised assessment orders for A.Y. 1943-44 to 1946-47 were passed on 31 January 1953 on the basis of the report of the Investigation Commission. Thereafter, on 20 March 1956 notices were issued under Section 34(1A) of the Income Tax Act,1922 (similar to Section 148 of the Act) seeking to reopen assessment fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... which has stated as under:- Hence, when recourse is sought to be taken to the provision of Section 148, there has necessarily to be the fulfillment of the jurisdictional requirement that the Assessing officer must have reason to believe that income has escaped assessment. To accept the contention of the revenue, in the present case, would be to allow a reopening of an assessment under section 148 on the ground that the Assessing officer is of the opinion that a contingency may arise in future resulting an escapement of income. That would, in our view, be wholly impermissible and would amount to a rewriting of the statutory provision . Therefore, the issue of impugned notices under Section 148 of the Act to safeguard against a future ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
