Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2007 (10) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2007 (10) TMI 626 - HC - Income TaxReopening of the assessment - Escapement of Income - Income from undisclosed source - Seizure of goods - Whether the Tribunal was justified in upholding the CIT(A)’s order quashing the reassessment made u/s 143(3)/148?- HELD THAT:- Tribunal held that - ''We are unable to accept the submission of the counsel for the revenue. As noticed, the goods were seized by the customs authorities somewhere in the third week of October, 1979 and after valuation of the said goods having been got done by the customs authorities from the Appraiser, Foreign Post Office, Jaipur, the said goods were delivered to Income-tax Officer under the provisions of section 132A(2), on 29-12-1980. As a matter of fact, the ITO, H-Ward, Jaipur framed provisional assessment order u/s 132(5), assessing the income of the assessee at ₹ 3,48,116. The assessee filed return of income for the assessment year 1980-81 thereafter on 31-5-1982 and the order u/s 143(1) accepting the return of income was passed on 15-6-1982. The Assessing Officer, thus, at the time of passing of the order dated 15-6-1982 had in his possession all primary facts necessary for framing the assessment and it was for him to draw proper inference from those facts which the Income-tax Officer did not do. It was, thus, plainly a case of oversight by the Assessing Officer and not that the income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment by the reason of omission or failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts. Our view finds support from the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Gemini Leather Stores v. ITO [1975 (5) TMI 1 - SUPREME COURT] wherein the Supreme Court upon consideration of the decisions in the case of Calcutta Discount Company v. ITO [1960 (11) TMI 8 - SUPREME COURT]; CIT v. Burlop Dealers Ltd. [1971 (1) TMI 10 - SUPREME COURT] and CIT v. Hemchandra Kar[1970 (4) TMI 3 - SUPREME COURT].'' The consideration of the matter by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is in accord with the law exposited by the Supreme Court in the afore-referred case. We are, thus, satisfied that the order of Income-tax Appellate Tribunal dated 27-3-1992 does not give rise to any question of law and the rejection of the application u/s 256(1) is not flawed. The Income-tax Application is, accordingly, dismissed.
|