9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (1) TMI 132X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tax Act, 1961 (for short "the Act") was issued to the assessee in March, 1985. The assessee did not file any return. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer issued notice under section 142(1) of the Act and the reassessment was done by making addition of Rs. 3,10,000 on account of cash credits appearing in the books which is as follows: Rs. (i) Shri Prakash V. Thakkar 1,50,000 (ii) Ambica Corporation 1,00,000 (iii) Sh. K. D. Khona 60,000 ---------- 3,10,000 ---------- The reason stated for addition was that Sh. N. J. Rawal, a hundi broker, through whom these amounts have been received, indulged in "hawala" transaction. These persons were not produced to support the fact of making advance to the assessee. The issue of reopening the as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the facts and law since the Assessing Officer had specifically carried out the enquiry and in spite of various opportunities, the assessee could not establish the identity, genuineness or creditworthiness of the creditors and further the staleness of claim does not make a wrong a right. It is clear from the records that the Assessing Officer did not carry out the directions given by the Tribunal for making assessment in the case. In the original assessment, the assessee had established the credits and the Assessing Officer being satisfied, did not make any addition thereof. The assessee did not know any of the creditors personally and the information on the basis of which action for reassessment was taken was based on the statement giv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not be reactivated beyond a particular stage and that lapse of time must induce repose in and set at rest judicial and quasijudicial controversies as it must in other spheres of human activity. So far as the income-tax assessment orders are concerned, they cannot be reopened on the score of income escaping assessment under section 147 of the Act of 1961 after the expiry of four years from the end of assessment year unless there be omission or failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for the assessment. As already mentioned, this cannot be said in the present case. The appeal is consequently allowed, the judgment of the High Court is set aside and the impugned notices are quashed. The part ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
