Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2013 (3) TMI 536

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the payment of Rs. 2.57 crores for the shares was in fact made on 30 January 2004. This was a fact which ought to have been disclosed to the AO, but which was not disclosed even in the further letter of the assessee dated 24 September 2007. In that letter, the assessee disclosed the initial payment of Rs. 28.65 lakhs on 9 December 1994, but carefully avoided disclosure of the fact that the payment of Rs. 2.57 crores was made only on 30 January 2004. Finally, it was on 30 January 2004 that the assessee addressed a communication to the Assessing Officer containing as many as fourteen annexures. One of them was a share certificate of DFPCL. That share certificate contained an endorsement to the effect that the assessee has paid the final .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he period of four years of the end of the relevant assessment year. Reasons have been disclosed to the assessee on 11 October 2012. The assessee filed its objections to the reopening of the assessment. The objections have been disposed of on 6 December 2012. 2. The assessee filed a return of income for A.Y. 2005-06. In the computation which is annexed to the return of income, the assessee inter alia claimed a long term loss on the sale of 10 lakh shares of a company by the name of Deepak Fertilizers and Petrochemicals Corporation Ltd. (DFPCL). In the computation of long term capital gains, the assessee stated that the date of acquisition of the shares was 9 December 1994. The cost of acquisition was stated to be Rs. 2.86 crores while the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... term capital loss. 3. The foundation of the notice under Section 148 as disclosed in the reasons furnished to the assessee is that during the relevant previous year, the assessee had shown a long term capital loss of Rs. 70.88 lakhs on account of the sale of 10 lakh shares of DFPCL. The share certificate revealed that the assessee had acquired those shares on 30 January 2004 and which were sold by the assessee on 12 May 2004. According to Assessing Officer, there was a short term capital gain of Rs. 2.80 crores which was not offered to tax as a result of which there was an under assessment of income by Rs. 2.80 crores. 4. The reopening in the present case, has taken place beyond the period of four years of the end of the relevant assess .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... full disclosure is a disclosure of all material facts which does not contain any hidden material or suppression of fact. A true disclosure is a disclosure which is truthful in all respects. Just as the power of the Revenue to reopen an assessment beyond a period of four years is restricted by the conditions precedent spelt out in the proviso to s. 147, equally an assessee who seeks the benefit of the proviso to s. 147 must make a full and true disclosure of all primary facts. At paras 9 and 11 Where the reopening has taken place beyond the period of four years, the jurisdictional requirement is that there must be a failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for that assessment year. (Dyn .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... unsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner. On these grounds, it was urged that there was a failure on the part of the assessee to disclose all the primary facts. Merely tendering to the Assessing Officer one day before the Assessing Officer passed the order of assessment, a letter containing a compilation of statements including the share certificate would not amount to valid compliance with the provisions of law. 7. The computation of income that was filed by the assessee together with the return of income stated that the assessee had purchased 10 lakh shares of DFPCL on 9 December 1994 at a cost of Rs. 2.86 crores. The assessee claimed that it sold the shares on 10 May 2004. It was on this basis that the assessee claimed the benefit .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates