2009 (3) TMI 512 - HC - Income Tax

Reassessment- The case of the petitioner is that the impugned notice under section 148 of the Act has been issued beyond the statutory period of four years as provided in section 147 of the Act and hence under the proviso thereto the burden is on the Revenue to show that the petitioner has either failed to furnish return of income or comply with the statutory notice referred to in the provisions or failed to disclose fully and truly all material facts relevant for the assessment of the assessment year in question. Held that- as the notice issued on the ground that the lease rent of paid by the for gas cylinders during the relevant accounting period had wrongly been claimed thus the action of the Assessing officer in issuing the notice under section 148 of the Act was nothing but a change of opinion on the same set of facts. the notice of reassessment was not valid and was liable to be quashed.

Summary

Issues:
Reopening of assessment beyond statutory period under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

Analysis:
The petitioner filed a return of income for the assessment year 2002-03, showing total income at Rs. nil. The assessment was framed under section 143(3) of the Act, determining the total income at Rs.2,80,96,870 on March 31, 2005. Subsequently, the respondent authority initiated reassessment proceedings by issuing a notice under section 148 of the Act on March 27, 2008, beyond the statutory period of four years as provided in section 147 of the Act. The reasons for reopening the assessment were related to the lease rent paid by the petitioner for gas cylinders and the short-term capital gain arising from the sale of cylinders during the same accounting period.

The petitioner contended that the impugned notice was issued beyond the statutory period, and the burden was on the Revenue to show failure on the part of the petitioner to furnish return of income or disclose all material facts. The petitioner argued that there was no failure or omission on their part, as all relevant details had been provided during the original assessment process. The respondent authority, however, argued that the notice was issued within the period of limitation and that the petitioner could have pursued alternative statutory remedies at the assessment stage.

The court referred to the provisions of section 147 of the Act, which allow the Assessing Officer to reopen a completed assessment if there is reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. The court noted that the impugned notice was issued beyond the four-year period but within the proviso to section 147, which requires the assessee to have committed specific defaults. In this case, the court found that there was no failure or omission on the part of the petitioner, as the Assessing Officer had already considered and accepted the lease rent issue during the original assessment.

Consequently, the court held that the action of the respondent authority in issuing the notice under section 148 of the Act was merely a change of opinion on the same set of facts. The court quashed and set aside the impugned notice dated March 27, 2008, under section 148 of the Act, ruling in favor of the petitioner. The petition was allowed with no order as to costs.