TMI Blog2001 (3) TMI 27X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... this court on September 17, 2001 (Dr. Amin's Pathology Laboratory v. P. N. Prasad, joint CIT (No. 1) [2001] 252 ITR 673 (Bom)). Simultaneously, the Department also issued notices dated March 2, 2001 and March 14, 2001, under section 148 of the Income-tax Act alleging escapement of income from assessment for the assessment years 1995-96 and 1996-97. The said notices are under challenge in the present two writ petitions. The only factual difference is that the impugned notices herein seek to set aside the intimation under section 143(1)(a) whereas, in the earlier Writ Petition No. 955 of 2001 the notice sought to reopen the assessment after the assessment order was passed under section 143(3) of the Act. Therefore, both the above writ peti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er, however, urged that the impugned notice dated March 14, 2001, is a sequel to the notice also dated March 14, 2001, given to the petitioner for the assessment year 1994-95. He contended that, that notice was given for the assessment year 1994-95 after the petitioner was assessed under section 143(3). He contended that even for the assessment year 1994-95 the reopening was sought on the ground that unpaid expenses were not disallowed. He, therefore, contended that the impugned notice in the present case is on the same grounds. as the impugned notice which was the subject-matter of the Writ Petition No. 955 of 2001 (see [20011 252 ITR 673 (Bom). He contended that although in the present case, reopening is sought of an order passed under se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Hence, the proviso to section 147 has no application. It is true that after the returns came to be accepted in respect of the assessment year 1995-96, four years have elapsed. However, there was no assessment under section 143(3) as in the case of the notice which is the subject-matter of Writ Petition No. 955 of 2001 (see [2001] 252 ITR 673 (Bom)). Therefore, the proviso to section 147 has no application to the facts of the present case. Under the Income tax Act, each year is a separate unit. Therefore, there is no merit in the argument advanced on behalf of the assessee that the impugned notice in the present case is a sequel to the notice dated March 14, 2001, which is the subject-matter of Writ Petition No. 955 of 2001 (see [2001] 252 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
