TMI Blog2004 (1) TMI 32X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d, therefore, the same are liable to be quashed and set aside - - - - - Dated:- 7-1-2004 - Judge(s) : V. C. DAGA., J. P. DEVADHAR. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by V. C. DAGA J. -This writ petition is directed against the notices issued under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the "Act" for short), seeking to reopen assessments for the assessment years 1982-83 and 1983-84. The basic challenge to the notices impugned in the petition incorporated at annexures A-1 and A-2 are that the notices are without jurisdiction. On being noticed, the respondents appeared and filed their counter affidavit and disclosed the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer for entertaining his belief that the income has escape ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Inamdar, the assessment order being under sub-section (3) of section 143, the assessments were made after due notice to the assessee and that too after detailed hearing from time to time as such it would not be permissible under section 147 to reopen the assessment after expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, unless any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for such assessment year by reason or failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for his assessment, for that assessment year. Mr. Inamdar, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the figures of refundable and non-refundable deposits were very much disclosed in the return. The said figures ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t and after going through the books of account and other material available, the assessments were completed. In this view of the matter, Mr. Inamdar, appearing for the petitioners, contends that the case of the Revenue cannot be said to be covered under the second part of the proviso to section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, so as to enable the Assessing Officer to invoke the larger period of limitation. In reply to the aforesaid submissions, Mr. Desai, learned senior counsel appearing for the Revenue, pressed into service para. 3 of the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer for reopening the assessments; wherein he has stated that there was omission or failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material fac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vailable at the time of assessment. No failure on the part of the petitioner to fully disclose the material facts is established by the Revenue. Under these circumstances, by no stretch of imagination it can be said that the assessee failed to make full and true disclosure of income in its return. It is no doubt true that the judgment of the apex court delivered in the case of Bazpur Co-operative Sugar Factory Limited [1988] 172 ITR 321 would be said to be information received, but in that event reopening or notice to reopen ought to have been issued within the period of four years from the last date of the assessment year. It is thus not open for the Revenue to exercise their right to reopen the assessment beyond the period of four years. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
