Contact us   Feedback   Annual Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (7) TMI 329 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

2016 (7) TMI 329 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT - TMI - Reopening of assessment - proceedings initiated after the expiry of 4 years from the end of the relevant assessment year - non disclosure - reasons to believe - Held that:- t during the course of the hearing, on 27th March, 2006 for Assessment Year 200203 in regular assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer sought for certain details. In response, the Respondent-Assessee gave details as sought, pointing out that an amount of ₹ 1.16 Crores sh .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

r is not satisfied. - The submission made on behalf of the Revenue that as the information was given on 30th March, 2006, it would amount to nondisclosure of information, is beyond our comprehension. The requirement of law is that the Respondent-Assesse should have made true and full disclosure of all material facts necessary for Assessment. This has been certainly done. In this case, letter dated 29th March, 2006 indicates that the details filed by the Respondent-Assessee consequent to the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Act, 1961 (the Act), challenges the order dated 19th April, 2013 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (the Tribunal). The impugned order of the Tribunal relates to Assessment Year 2003-04. 2. The Revenue urges only the following question of law for our consideration: (a) Whether on the facts and in the circumstance of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in quashing the proceedings u/s. 147/148 holding that the said proceedings were invalid as they had been initiated after the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ails which reads as under: Misc. Deposits (SBI Madras) ₹ 32,58,752/ We had received the contract to construct LHO building at Aparna Complex, Chennai, from State Bank of India for ₹ 7,23,19,564/in the year 1996. Out of th above we have received ₹ 6,75,75,629/against the bills certified. We submitted out prefinal bill to the SBI on 26.11.2001. The said bill was accounted for as income in the previous year relevant to A.Y. 200203. Further, from various bills in the past the Bank .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

view that it would be very difficult to get the money refunded from the SBI. It is submitted that the dispute is a prolonged dispute and is still going on. It is further submitted that finally we have been able to recover the said sum from SBI and an amount of ₹ 1,16,54,036is received in the year 2005-06. This amount has been offered to tax u/s. 41(1) of the Act in the year 2006-07. On the basis of the aforesaid information, the assessment proceedings were completed under Section 143(3) of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

; 2,82,66,650/includes an amount of ₹ 32,58,752/on account of nonreceipt of due from SBI. However, the Assessing Officer disallowed the entire bad debt amount and added back in computing the income. Perusal of records shown that the bad debts claimed by the assessee pertained to earlier year. However, the assessee has also received an amount of ₹ 1,16,54,036/during the F. Y. 2005-06 and the same was offered for A. Y. 2006-07 u/s. 41(1) of the Act. Since, the assessee has claimed the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

y the Respondent-Assessee during the financial year 2005-06 had been disclosed to the Assessing Officer during the assessment proceedings. It was also contended that this issue was not only fully disclosed but was also a subject matter of consideration during the regular assessment proceedings. Therefore, the notice for reopening was bad. However, the Assessing Office did not accept the objection. The Assessing Officer, thereafter passed an order on 18th December, 2009 under Section 143(3) read .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

48 of the Act sought to reopen the assessment for Assessment Year 2003-04. Thus, undisputedly beyond a period of four years from the end of the relevant Assessment Year. This is particularly in view of the fact that during the assessment proceedings leading to the order dated 31st March, 2006, the Assessing Officer had sought for details in respect of receipt of ₹ 1.16 Crores and the same was disclosed by the Respondent-Assessee during the assessment proceedings, as is evident by letter da .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Assessee to truly and fully disclose all material facts during the regular assessment proceedings. This, according to him, is for the reason that the details were furnished by the Respondent-Assessee only by letter dated 29th March, 2006 received on 30th March, 2006 by the Assessing Officer, when the period for passing the Assessment Order was expiring on 31st March, 2006. Therefore, it is contended that the reopening notice is not hit by the first proviso to Section 147 of the Act. 9 It is an u .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version