TMI Blog2006 (9) TMI 87X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on December 6, 1985 and certain documents and books were seized from the assessee's premises which were impounded under Section 131(3) of the Act and on basis of analysis of all those documents, the reassessment proceeding for assessment year 1984-85 was initiated by issuing notice under Section 148 on April 14, 1986. During the pendency of all these proceedings the amnesty scheme inviting the tax payers to clean their tax defaults with certain concession was brought into the effect by the Central Government and the assessee made application thereunder on December 16, 1987. The application related to surrender of income from assessment year 1984-85 to 1986-87. For the assessment year 1984-85, the assessee surrendered the income from undisclosed sources at Rs.66,000/- stating it to be peak cash credit for that period, which could not be explained. 5. On making of this application the inspecting Assistant Commissioner with whom the authority vested for making an order of settlement under amnesty scheme called for report from the Income Tax Officer. The Income-tax Officer in its letter dated 29th March, 1987 proposed additions on account of peak cash credits determined by him fro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t which has gone into consideration while making the order of settlement by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner it is a case of change of opinion on the part of the Income Tax Officer. Mere change of opinion by considering the same material which has already been considered and interpreted on earlier occasion, cannot give jurisdiction to the Assessing Officer to initiate proceedings under Section 147/148 of Income Tax Act. 9. Secondly, it was contended that since earlier reassessment order was made under Section 143(3) and all documents on the basis of which the reassessment proceedings have been initiated were in possession of the Assessing Officer himself since 1985. The omission or failure on the part of the assessee to disclose any facts truly or correctly on the basis of such documents cannot be attributed to the assessee as he was not in possession of those documents to make any submission on that behalf. He, therefore, contends that in the aforesaid circumstances, when the escapement of income, satisfaction about which even if held to be based on some material, but which failure is not attributable to omission or failure on the part of the assessee, the period of limi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for any assessment year, he may, subject to the provisions of Section 148 to 153, assess or reassess such income and also any other income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment and which comes to his notice subsequently in the course of the proceedings under this section, or recompute the loss or the depreciation allowance or any other allowance, as the case may be, for the assessment year concerned (hereafter in this section and in section 148 to 153 referred to as the relevant assessment year):" 13. The Proviso to Section 147 envisages that in case satisfaction of the Assessing Officer about escapement of that income chargeable to tax assessment is not attributable to any default on the part of the assessee. It puts an embargo to assume jurisdiction in any case after the expiry of four years from the end of relevant assessment year. Proviso to Section 147 reads as under : "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 a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... "There can be no doubt that the duty of disclosing all the primary facts relevant to the decision of the question before the assessing authority lies on the assessee........ Does the duty, however, extend beyond the full and truthful disclosure of all primary facts? In our opinion, the answer to this question must be in the negative. Once all the primary facts are before the assessing, he requires no further assistance by way of disclosure. It is for him to decide what inferences of facts can be reasonably drawn and what legal inferences have ultimately to be drawn. It is not for somebody else-far less the assessee—to tell the assessing authority what inferences, whether of facts or law, should be drawn." 19. Apparently, after examining all the papers particularly with respect to question of 'peak cash credit' during the previous year relevant assessment period 1984-85 was the matter of drawing inference from the documents in possession of the respondents since December 1985. The respondents being in possession of those documents, the same were examined and analysed by the officers of the respondents before considering the application of the petitioner seeking benefit under t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
