Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2005 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2005 (9) TMI 261 - AT - Income TaxIncome Escaping Assessment - Challenge to the legality of the issuance of notice u/s 148 - Can Assessing Officer initiate reassessment proceedings on the basis of the report of the DDIT - HELD THAT:- It is found that the DDIT, Bikaner sent his report in which the assessee had allegedly accepted having earned income from X-ray, clinic, lab tests, etc. which was not fully disclosed. It is the case of the assessee that the said DDIT got signed blank papers from him on which he himself recorded facts at the back of the assessee, which were totally incorrect. If it had been a mere assertion by the assessee, we would have not taken a minute to reject this contention. However, we find that within five days of appearance of the assessee before the DDIT, the assessee wrote a registered letter pleading for the return of the blank papers which were forcefully got signed from him. Copies of letter written to the Finance Minister of India, Central Vigilance Officer, New Delhi complaining about the conduct of the officer and the manner in which he was compelled to sign the blank papers, are available in second PB alongwith proof of despatch of such letters by registered post. No material is brought on record by the ld. D.R. that the said DDIT took any steps to negate the allegation made by the assessee. The stand of the assessee regarding forcefully signing certain blank papers in this regard gets corroborated from the fact that copy of the allegedly signed statement, which was supplied to the assessee at the instance of the Hon'ble High Court consisted of only six pages and was incomplete due to exhaustion of blank signed papers before it could be concluded. Non-availability of page 7 of the statement, which is admittedly a continued statement up to page 6, coincides with the assessee's version that few blank papers were got signed from the assessee by the DDIT and the assessee had not given any statement before him. In such circumstances, we are not inclined to give any weightage to the alleged statement of the assessee, on the basis of which the Assessing Officer has estimated the income. If this so called statement is excluded from the evidence, there remains nothing to indicate that the assessee had earned any income, which was not properly disclosed in his return. Thus, we are of the considered opinion that the ld. CIT(A) was not justified in both, upholding the initiation of reassessment proceedings and sustaining the addition so made to a large extent. By overturning the impugned order, we quash the reassessment and consequential additions made therein. In the assessment year 1995-96 the assessee furnished his return declaring income of Rs. 76,020. The Assessing Officer reopened the assessment on similar pattern as in the preceding year and computed total income at Rs. 6,34,510. Similarly, in the assessment years 1996-97 to 1998-99, the assessee filed returns with income of Rs. 81,020, Rs. 2,13,570 and Rs. 2,48,859 and the Assessing Officer determined total incomes at Rs. 7,95,634, Rs. 8,78,530 and Rs. 7,48,859 respectively. Both the sides are in agreement that the Assessing Officer initiated reassessment proceedings in the same manner as in assessment year 1994-95 and the resultant additions made were confirmed by the ld. first appellate authority accordingly. Following the view taken above, we annul the reassessment orders and accordingly order for the deletion of all the additions made and sustained in these years. In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed.
|