TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 110X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f Income Tax v. Kelvinator of India Ltd (2010 (1) TMI 11 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA) that a notice for re-opening the assessment is permissible only when it: (i) does not amount to “change of opinion”; (ii) is based on tangible material/evidence but is not opposed to the existing record and (iii) points to suppression of material facts by the assessee in the original return. In the present case, none of these elements ex facie exist to justify the impugned notice. It is therefore quashed as are all proceedings emanating from the impugned notice. - Decided in favor of assessee. - W.P.(C) 11658/2016, C.M. APPL.45916-45917/2016 - - - Dated:- 7-2-2017 - S. Ravindra Bhat And Najmi Waziri, JJ. For the Petitioner : Sh. Rupesh Jain, Advoc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... olved in the business of producing and selling TECHNITUBER seed potatoes and field generated seed potatoes. Assessee claimed it as purely agricultural activity but after deep investigation, it was established that income generated from this activity is not an agricultural income because assessee has no interest in the land nor it actually cultivates the land. Assessee is getting the land cultivated from growers by way of contract faring. As held in similar situation by Hon ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT v. Namadhari Seeds Pvt. Ltde. (2011) 16 taxmann.com 83. 2. As the assessee has wrongly claimed the income of ₹ 2,79,65,067/- as agricultural income while computing its income for AY 2009-10 otherwise which would have ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n, which is not permissible having regard to the narrow scope of Section 147/148 of the Act which admits re-assessment proceedings only if tangible material as to escapement of income on the ground of non-disclosure of material facts, is discerned. 3. The learned counsel for the revenue seeks to justify the reassessment notice and urges that since it was for the subsequent year, and the matters which came to light are sufficient grounds to constitute tangible material, there were valid reasons to believe under Section 147 of the Act that there was escapement of income. It is submitted that in these circumstances the Court should desist from exercising writ jurisdiction. As is evident, the completed scrutiny assessment for the concerned y ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
