TMI Blog2008 (6) TMI 193X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... AND H. B. ANTANI JJ. S. N. Soparkar with Varun Patel for the petitioner. Ms. M. M. Bhatt for the respondent. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by D. A. MEHTA J. - In each of these petitions, the parties are common and the challenge is to notice dated 10-05-2000, issued by the respondent under section148 of the Income-tax, 1961 ("the Act"). The parties are ad idem that the facts and contentions in all material particulars remain identical in each of the petitions. Hence, the petitions are taken up for hearing together and disposed of by this common judgment. 2. The facts, as are obtained in Special Civil Application No. 12050 of 2000, are narrated for appreciating the controversy between the parties. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed a decision in the case of CIT Vs. Sterling Foods [1999] 237 ITR 579 that export incentive benefits are not income derived from manufacturing and, therefore, they are not eligible for deduction under sections 80HH and 80-I. On the basis of this decision of the hon'ble Supreme Court, I now form a belief that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment because excess deduction under sections 80HH and 80-I was allowed. It was further found that the assessee has also done some trading during the year. Sale of trade goods was of Rs. 6,07,510. On the profits relatable to this trade goods, the assessee is not eligible for deduction under sections 80HH and 80-I. The assessee has made incorrect disclosure of income by showing trading incom ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... would it amount to partial disclosure, nor would it amount to false disclosure. It was, therefore, submitted that the impugned notices for all the four assessment years were bad in law and were required to be quashed. In support of the submissions made, reliance has been placed on the decision of this court in the case of Denish Industries Limited v. Income Tax Officer, [2004] 271 ITR 340 (Guj). 5. On behalf of the respondent, Ms. M. M. Bhatt, learned standing counsel submitted that the judgment of the Supreme Court would always constitute information for the purpose of reopening of the assessment, and hence, the action of the respondent-authority was perfectly justified. In support of the submissions, reliance has been placed on th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Act; or (iii) to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment of the relevant assessment year, no action can be taken by the Assessing Officer. In the present case, admittedly, the first two contingencies cannot be pressed into service by the respondent. 7. The only question that would then survive would be whether there was any failure on the part of the petitioner-assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for the assessment. Though in the reasons recorded, the respondent has stated so, apparently, the said statement does not merit acceptance for the simple reason that if all material facts had not been fully and truly disclosed by the assessee, there was no occasion for the Assessing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... information yet if the period of four years has expired, unless and until the prerequisite conditions stipulated by the proviso to section 147 of the Act are shown to be fulfilled, no action can be initiated for reassessment. 9. Reference to provisions of Explanation 2 of the Act also cannot assist the case of the Revenue. The language employed by the proviso itself indicates that the Legislature has consciously laid down a time frame within which reassessment proceedings in relation to escaped income can be initiated, and beyond the prescribed period of limitation, even if income has escaped assessment, if the required conditions enumerated in the proviso are not shown to exist, no action can be initiated under section 147 of the Act r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
