TMI Blog2020 (6) TMI 301X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t to deny the adjustments made under is therefore without jurisdiction. Therefore, the proviso to Section 147 puts an embargo on the respondent from proceeding further as no action shall be taken under this section after the 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 of the failure on the part of the assessee to make a return under Section 139 or in response to a notice issued under sub-section (1) of Section 142 or Section 148 or to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for his assessment, for that assessment year. If in the course of such proceedings the respondent comes to a conclusion that there were o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ting the respondent to drop the proposed re-assessment proceedings initiated by the respondent. 3. The petitioner is engaged in the manufacture of fertilizers, mixtures, micro nutrient fertilizers, bio pesticides, high quality seeds, and marketing of agro inputs, marketing of consumer industrial products, distributors of agro chemicals, Estate stores, Bata products, Tarpaulins etc. It is also engaged in manufacture of coffee powder, purchase and sale of coffee seeds and tea and retreading of automobile tyres. 4. According to the petitioner, pursuant to the order dated 05.03.2010 of this Court, M/s.Stanes Tyre Rubber Products Limited (Transferror Company) merged with the petitioner (M/s.Stanes Company limited) with effect from 01.04 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2,43,39,658/- rounded off to ₹ 61,22,650/- after the adjustments. * Under Section 115JB of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 7. These returns were sought to be re-opened under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. To which the petitioner was also filed its objections. By the impugned orders, the respondent has rejected/ overruled the objections of the petitioner against the reopening of the assessments. The details are as follows:- W.P.No. Assessment Year Notice u/s.148 of the Act Objection date Impugned communications date overruling the objections 30564/2016 2010-2011 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Vijaya Retreders (2001) no manufacturing is involved in tyre retreading. Therefore, the assessee company is not eligible to adjust the brought forward loss of amalgamating company. The assessment in this case was completed u/s 143(3) of the IT Act, 1961 on 25.03.2014 by assessing total income of ₹ 7,32,73,599/- under Normal Provisions of the IT Act. Subsequently it is noticed that on 05.03.2010 the assessee company has obtained an order from Hon'ble Madras High Court approving the scheme of amalgamation between the Holding company T. Stanes Co. Ltd. (Assessee company) and fully owned subsidery company M/s. Stanes Tyre and Rubber Products Ltd. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sued for the respective Assessment Years, it is submitted that mere production of documents before the Assessing Officer the books of account or other document from which material evidence could be gathered with due diligence by the assessing officer will not amount to disclosure contemplated in Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. It is further submitted that Explanation 2 to Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is attracted. It is further submitted that it is open for the petitioner to make all submissions before the respondent and in case there is a case for dropping on merits, the proceedings will be dropped on merits. 11. From a reading of the above it is evident that the only reason for reopening the assessment of the petiti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d communication dated 26.08.2016 for the Assessment Year 2011-2012 issued pursuant to the decision of the Supreme Court in GKN Drive Shafts indicates that invocation of Section 148 for the purpose of proviso to Section 147 qua denial of adjustments under Section 72A(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is inspired from the change of opinion as the petitioner has disclosed the basis on which the petitioner was claiming deductions. Thus, the proposal in the impugned communications would clearly be in violation of the decision of the Honourable Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd, (2010) 2 SCC 723 . 15. The issue as to whether the petitioner was entitled to adjust the loss of the brought forward from the books of accounts of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
