9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (8) TMI 528X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r month. The same was offered for tax as income from the house property every year. 3. In the year 1952, the Parliament passed the Requisition and the Acquisition of the Immovable Property Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as "The Requisition Act"), sections 25 and 26 whereof provide that any immovable property requisitioned under the Defence of India Act and Rules made thereunder which had not been released from the requisition, would be deemed to have been requisitioned by the competent authority under the provisions of the Requisition Act. 4. By a letter dated 22.3.1983, the Estate Manager of the Government of India informed the applicant that the compensation in respect of the premises had been revised from Rs.3618.21 to Rs.19,259.29 with effect from 7.3.1975. The applicant was informed that the difference in compensation for the period 7.3.1975 to 31.12.1982 aggregated to Rs.14,68,172.28 and stated that the same would be paid to the applicant by 31.3.1983. Accordingly on 31.3.1983, the applicant received the arrears of rent for the period 7.3.1975 to 31.12.1982. 5. On 29.7.1983, the applicant filed its return of income for the A.Y. 1983-1984. Mr. Pardiwalla, the learned se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessment. - If - (a) the Income-tax Officer has reason to believe that, by reason of the omission or failure on the part of an assessee to make a return under section 139 for any assessment year to the Incometax Officer or to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for his assessment for that year, income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for that year, or (b) notwithstanding that there has been no omission or failure as mentioned in clause (a) on the part of the assessee, the Income-tax Officer has in consequence of information in his possession reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for any assessment year, he may, subject to the provisions of sections 148 to 153, assess or reassess such income or recompute the loss or the depreciation allowance, as the case may be, for the assessment year concerned (hereafter in sections 148 to 153 referred to as the relevant assessment year)." 9. The applicant challenged the reopening unsuccessfully right upto the ITAT. 10. The said Note 16 to the Accounts included in the return for A.Y. 1983-1984 stated that the arrears would be accounted for in the applicant's account for the year end ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lla's second contention, which relates to the merits of the matter viz. the legality of bringing to tax the arrears in the said three assessment years. (D). Paragraph 9 of the Statement of Case reads as under :- "9. On the basis of the aforesaid facts, we clearly are of the view that a reference is called for. We do not agree with the submissions made by the learned senior Departmental Representative that the finding of the Tribunal that the information given by the assessee was not definite one, did not involve any question of law. It, in the facts and circumstances of the case, does give rise to a question of law." The first sentence of paragraph 9 itself makes it clear that the Tribunal held that the reference was called for only on the question of the validity of the proceedings under section 147(b) of the said Act. Everything that preceded paragraph 9 related only to the same and not to the second contention. The doubt if any, is set at rest by the second statement in paragraph 9 which also refers only to the proceedings under section 147(b) of the said Act. 16. It is in this context that paragraph 10, relied upon by Mr. Pardiwalla must be read. Paragraph 10 reads as under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessment orders. There may well be circumstances which would lead to such an inference. That, however, would depend on the facts of each case. In the facts of this case, we are not inclined to speculate in the respondent's favour. 22. An AO is not concerned with only one assessee or three assessment orders. If judicial notice may be taken it must be of the fact that an AO has considerable other work including the assessment proceedings of several assessees. We see no reason to presume that the AO would remember all the material and all the facts in respect of the assessment proceedings for a particular year while dealing with the assessment proceedings of another year even in respect of the same assessee. There is nothing to suggest that the AO while making the assessment orders in each of the said years, in fact, considered the material available in respect of the other years. That the assessment orders were made at different dates albeit within a gap of only few days indicate the contrary. The exigencies and the burden of the work may well result in his inability to correlate the material between various assessment proceedings even though made only within a few days of each othe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
