TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 673X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the Department's own showing in view of subsequent events that is the appeal of M/s. Kala Mines being allowed, that the reopening of the assessment was necessary. Even in the order, there is no reference to the argument of the Petitioner that he had not failed to disclose fully and truly all material facts. It is not enough that in the reasons supplied there is one line to the effect that 'due to failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truthfully all material facts necessary for his assessment for the relevant Assessment Year, AY 2010-11'. This is just copying and incorporating the language of the section to assume jurisdiction. Such mere lip service is not enough. The jurisdictional requirement in the present case, n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The reasons were supplied to the Petitioner by Respondent No.1 on 24 July 2017. The Petitioner submitted his objections on 7 August 2017 to the Respondent No.1. The Respondent No.1 passed an order on 16 August 2017, disposing of the objections raised by the Petitioner. The Petitioner has approached this Court seeking to quash the Notice dated 30 March 2017, issued by the Respondent under Section 148 of the Act. 4. By an order dated 7 November 2017, the Petition was directed to be disposed of finally at the admission stage and an ad interim relief was granted. 5. We have heard Mr. Nitin Sardessai, learned Senior Advocate for the Petitioner and Ms. Amira Razaq, learned Standing Counsel for the Respondents No.1 to 3. 6. Section 147 o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... viso to Section 147 comes into play. Though the time limit for notice for an amount of one lakh rupees and more for that year as specified in Section 149(1(b) is indicated as six years, the rider provided in the proviso to Section 147, is applicable. 8. On the aspect of reopening of assessment, through various judicial pronouncements, certain basic parameters stand firmly established. Section 147 of the Act empowers the Assessing Officer, if he has a reason to believe that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment, to reassess the income. Section 147 however contains a proviso that no action under Section 147 will be taken after a period of expiry of four years of the end of relevant assessment year, unless the assessee had fai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... purchase of land at Quepem vide agreement dated 27/07/2009. Subsequently the above party could not meet the condition implicit in the MOU within the time frame and the said amount is claimed to be forfeited by the assessee firm and claimed as bad debts accordingly. The AO, while passing order u/s 143(3) disallowed the bad debts claim of the assessee firm and ₹ 1.30 Cr. was added to the returned income. The assessee firm got relief from the CIT(A), vide order in ITA No.104/MRG/2013-14 dated 22/11/2013 on the issue of bad debts. Therefore, the amount of ₹ 1.30 Cr. received by Shri Cedric De Souza Faria, has escaped assessment without taxation. Therefore, I have reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nes being allowed, that the reopening of the assessment was necessary. Even in the order, there is no reference to the argument of the Petitioner that he had not failed to disclose fully and truly all material facts. It is not enough that in the reasons supplied there is one line to the effect that 'due to failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truthfully all material facts necessary for his assessment for the relevant Assessment Year, AY 2010-11'. This is just copying and incorporating the language of the section to assume jurisdiction. Such mere lip service is not enough. When the Respondent No.1 dealt with this explanation, reference to this jurisdictional requirement is found only in paragraph 5, while narr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
