Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1990 (7) TMI 100

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... to 1986-87 and also to quash the notices issued under section 142(1) of the Act for the assessment years 1982-83 to 1986-87. At the time of arguments, however, the attack was confined only to the notices under section 148. Civil Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 1396 of 1989 is filed by the association of persons, Messrs. Pramod Kumar Rakesh Kumar and Co. The members of this association are Pramod Kumar (40%), Rakesh Kumar (40%) and Girraj Kishore (20%). Those three persons have filed separate writ petitions being Civil Miscellaneous Writ Petitions Nos, 1394, 1397 and 1395 of 1989, respectively. The prayers in these writ petitions are practically the same as those contained in Civil Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 1396 of 1989 with minor v .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... reopen the assessment. Such reopening is barred under the Amnesty Scheme as clarified from time to time. The Income-tax Officer, however, refused to drop the proceedings and proposed to proceed further in pursuance of the impugned notices, whereupon the present writ petitions were filed. The main ground urged in the writ petitions is that the returns having been filed and the assessment having been made under and in pursuance of the Amnesty Scheme, it is not open to the Income-tax Officer to make fishing inquiry or to reopen the assessment. The Income-tax Officer had no jurisdiction to reopen the assessment, it is argued. A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents denying that the returns were filed under the Amnes .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... for the assessment year 1984-85. It first recites that the assessments in respect of the assessment years 1984-85 to 1986-87 were made on January 28, 1987, under section 143(1) and the income disclosed was accepted. Then it states, "Some enquiries were made and the assessee also furnished a list of drafts got issued by Messrs. Pramod Kumar Rakesh Kumar and Co. (association of persons), New Mandi, M. Nagar, during the financial year 1985-86 relevant to the assessment year 1986-87. This list shows bank drafts for the amount of Rs. 37,95,000 which were encashed by the assessee within 3 or 4 days. Information was collected from banks. The assessee has not maintained any books or records regarding the cash flow position and the day-to-day purcha .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... reasonable time should be granted to him to ascertain the truth of these facts and to file a reply to the rejoinder-affidavit as supplementary counter-affidavit. As prayed, three weeks' time is granted to enable him to do so." The Revenue has, however, not filed any supplementary counter-affidavit to the rejoinder-affidavit filed by the petitioners. We did not think it appropriate to give any further time to the Revenue and we proceeded to hear the cases. The attack is upon the validity of the notices under section 147(a) read with section 148. The main ground of challenge was that inasmuch as the returns had been filed under the Amnesty Scheme and also because the assessments had also been made, accepting the said returns, there is no .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... it petition. This contention has been raised only in the rejoinder-affidavit. It is true that the Revenue offered to file a supplementary counter-affidavit to this allegation made in the rejoinder-affidavit and but has failed to do so, yet we are of the opinion that the petitioners are not entitled to succeed. The "reasons recorded" clearly recite that some inquiries were made and information was collected from banks. There are no reasons to believe that these inquiries were made and information was collected from banks even before the assessment was made. On the contrary, it appears from the "reasons recorded" that they were subsequent to the assessment order. It is thus clear that even if we proceed on the assumption-we do not express any .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates