TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 739X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h etc.). Likewise, the ITR form disclosing returns raise more questions than satisfy the queries. They merely show that the share applicants paid paltry amounts as income tax even while claiming to have invested amounts ranging over ₹ 8 crores. Clearly, there was no full disclosure of material facts. Thus we are of the opinion that the petitioner is disentitled to relief. The impugned notice is valid. - Decided against assessee - W. P. (C) 2385/2015 - - - Dated:- 1-12-2016 - S. Ravindra Bhat And Najmi Waziri, JJ. For the Petitioner : Ms. Meenakshi Arora, Sr. Advocate with Sh. Shaubhagya Aggarwal, Sh. Deepak Shukla and Sh. Alok Singh, Advocates For the Respondent : Sh. Sanjay Kumar, Sr. Standing Counsel ORDER Mr. Justice S. Ravindra Bhat (Open Court) 1. The petitioner is aggrieved by a notice issued by the Assessing Officer (AO) under Sections 147/148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereafter the Act ]. The Reasons to Believe were later furnished in the form of a document to the assessee/petitioner; they appear to have been recorded on 19.11.2013. The relevant part of the said document outlining why reassessment was proposed reads as follows: XXXX ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rnished by these parties at that time. Summons were issued to the directors of the above mentioned companies. These summons were returned. An Inspector was deputed to physically verify the addresses of the registered offices of the above mentioned companies. The result of the enquiries is as follows: S. No . Name of the allottee which has invested in Aravalli group companies Address Findings 1. Shree Raj Shaymji Footwears P. Ltd. A-1/321, Paschim Vihar, New Delhi The premises is a residence of Sh. R.K. Gupta and Sh. Sahil Gupta. 2. Sigma Real Tech P. Ltd. M-20, Dewan House, Ajay Enclave, Subhash Nagar, New Delhi The premises was locked. 3. Spark Computech P. Ltd. M-20, Dewan House, Ajay Enclave, Subhash Nagar, New Delhi The premises was locked. As the above said companies did not exist at their given addresses, the assessee vide que ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e argued that at the time of the assessment for AY 2008-09, the concerned Assessing Officer (AO) had made specific queries with respect to what is now sought to be re-opened. A pointed reference was made to the letter of the AO dated 21.12.2009 which had elicited information with respect to various matters. The relevant facts sought in that notice are extracted below: 10. Details of addition to share capital party wise, share premium, share application money and unsecured loan received (party wise), during the financial year 2007-08 with complete name, address of the parties with PAN and ward/circle proving genuineness of the same. Also the confirmations from these parties. 3. It was urged that in compliance with the notice, the assessee had furnished all details and particulars relating to it. Learned counsel relied upon the voluminous documents filed which include copies of account information issued to the share applicants/third parties, containing cheque numbers, the ITR forms of the share applicants/third parties etc. and stated that since the AO framed the assessment after being satisfied with regard to the replies to the queries and having regard to the re-asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in submission is that reassessment notice proposes a look-in to the original assessment for AY 2008-09 on three grounds all of which are covered in the course of enquiry in the original assessment proceedings completed under scrutiny under Section 143(3). It is argued that there is in fact no live link between the tangible material relied upon by the revenue and the completed assessment, warranting such reassessment/reopening. The entire emphasis during the course of hearing was that what was queried was in fact satisfactorily replied earlier to resulting in a completed assessment and that such matters cannot be reopened since it would amount to impermissible review. 6. In Kelvinator (supra), the Supreme Court had succinctly summarised the legal requirements for a valid notice under Section 147 and stated inter alia that, Hence, after 1-4-1989, the assessing officer has power to reopen, provided there is tangible material to come to the conclusion that there is escapement of income from assessment. Reasons must have a live link with the formation of the belief . 7. Haryana Acrylic (supra) - on which the petitioner relied upon heavily is instructive in the circumstances o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... earing for the assessee-respondent to counter this submission advanced on behalf of the revenue. Accepting the legal position indicated in these cases we come to the conclusion that it was not for the High Court to examine the validity of the notice under Section 148 in regard to the two items if the High Court came to the conclusion that the notice was valid at least in respect of the remaining item. Whether the Income Tax Officer while making his reassessment would take into account the other two items should have been left to be considered by the Income Tax officer in the fresh assessment proceeding. 8 This Court in Calcutta Discount Company Limited v. ITO 1961 (41) ITR 191 held that the expression material facts‟ used in clause (a) referred only to primary facts and the duty of the assessee was confined to disclosure of primary facts and he had not to indicate what factual or legal inferences should properly be drawn from the primary facts .. 9. Likewise in Wel Intertrade (supra), the Court again emphasized that: ..it must also be established as a fact that such escapement of assessment has been occasioned by either the assessee failing to make ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
