2008 (1) TMI 206 - HC - Income Tax

Reassessment proceedings have been initiated by the Assessing Officer for the reasons recorded in writing non-availability of a few documents demanded by the petitioner-assessee would not make the reassessment proceedings initiated illegal challenge of the assessee to reassessment proceedings on the grounds set out in the petition is absolutely misconceived Moreover the interest of the petitioner-assessee stands sufficiently safeguarded by the learned Tribunal reassessment is valid

Summary

Issues: Reassessment proceedings under sections 147, 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 1994-95.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner filed a return of income for the assessment year 1994-95, declaring income of Rs. 46,530. Subsequently, reassessment proceedings were initiated based on tax evasion petitions and information gathered during enquiries. The Income Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) quashed reassessment orders for other years due to reasons not being supplied to the assessee. The ITAT directed the Assessing Officer to provide reasons and address objections. The petitioner received reasons for reassessment for 1994-95 in 2007.

2. The petitioner raised concerns about missing pages in the reasons supplied and requested additional documents. The Assessing Officer clarified the relevance of the requested documents and directed the petitioner to file objections. The petitioner sought more time for objections, which was denied. The petitioner submitted partial objections against the reassessment proceedings, further requesting an adjournment that was also rejected.

3. The petitioner contended that the reassessment was initiated without recording proper reasons and based on incorrect facts. However, the court emphasized that the sufficiency of reasons for forming a belief by the Assessing Officer cannot be examined under extraordinary jurisdiction. The petitioner's dilatory tactics were noted as the reassessment proceedings were approaching the time bar.

4. The court found that the reassessment proceedings were initiated with detailed reasons, and the petitioner's demands for documents had been addressed. The court highlighted that if the petitioner believed certain reasons were not sustainable, objections could be raised before the Assessing Officer. Ultimately, the challenge to the reassessment proceedings was deemed misconceived, and the writ petition was dismissed for lack of merit, with no costs awarded.