TMI Blog2014 (11) TMI 950X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e least, the reasons must lead to the clear and direct inference that there was a failure on the part of the assessee to fully and truly disclose all material facts necessary for assessment - the reasons must indicate which material fact was not fully and truly disclosed – in the reasons recorded, there is neither any allegation that the assessee had failed to truly and fully disclose material facts at the time of the assessment - one of the essential ingredients for re-opening an assessment beyond the period of four years has not been satisfied - The re-assessment proceedings are bad in law – the notice u/s 148 and the re-assessment order is set aside – Decided in favour of assessee. - W. P. (C) 6159/2013 & CM 13549/2013 - - - Dated:- 24 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sment year): Provided that where an assessment under sub-section (3) of section 143 or this section has been made for the relevant assessment year, no action shall be taken under this section after the expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, unless any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for such assessment year by reason of the failure on the part of the assessee to make a return under section 139 or in response to a notice issued under sub-section (1) of section 142 or section 148 or to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for his assessment, for that assessment year: 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the re-assessment proceedings were bad in law inasmuc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5. It was also pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the company had, in fact, been wound up on 15.11.2011 by virtue of an order passed by the Andhra Pradesh High Court. However, we are not examining that aspect of the matter inasmuch as this petition can be disposed of on the simple point as to whether the petitioner had made a full and true disclosure of the material facts necessary for its assessment or not. 6. As mentioned above, on the issuance of the notice dated 28.03.2012, the petitioner asked for the reasons behind the issuance of the notice and the same were thereafter supplied to the petitioner. The purported reasons were as under:- Reasons for issuance of notice u/s 148 of the I.T. Act, 1961 Nam ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ear 2005-06. Sd/- Income Tax Officer Ward 8(2), New Delhi 7. The petitioner filed its objections to the said reasons and in paragraph 2.5 of the said objections the specific plea of time bar and non-compliance with the conditions precedent stipulated in the proviso to Section 147 were taken. The relevant portion of the objections is as under:- 2.5 Initiation of re-assessment proceedings is time barred It is respectfully submitted that there has been no escapement as alleged and the said purported proceedings are barred by limitation and have been initiated in violation of the provisions of the Act. In this regard it would be pertinent to refer to the proviso to Section 147 of the Act which reads as under: Provided that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... material facts for his assessment for that assessment year. It would be appreciated that Skyworks India has provided all the documents and details called for in the course of assessment proceedings initiated by your office. Also, there is no indication in the notice issued under Section 147 of the Act that there was a failure or omission on part of Skyworks India to truly disclose the material facts necessary for assessment. 8. However, the Assessing Officer was not convinced with the objections taken by the petitioner and passed an order dated 20.12.2012 rejecting the objections. The order, however, did not consider the point raised by the assessee that the reasons themselves did not contain any allegation that there was a failure o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... allegation that the assessee had failed to truly disclose any material facts at the time of assessment, nor can we readily infer the same in view of the fact that a detailed enquiry had been conducted by the Assessing Officer with regard to the identity and creditworthiness of the share-applicants and genuineness of the transactions in relation to the share application money received by the assessee. Further the mere statement that the DRI has seized certain goods of the assessee and levied a penalty also cannot be stated to be a reason for reopening of assessment of the assessee as the said statement made is neither followed by the recording of a belief that the income escaped on that count or that the assessee has failed to disclose all r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
