9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (8) TMI 177X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... i.e. 2012-13, the writ applicant received Rs. 1,23,89,040/- from M/s. Chetan Enterprise, which was non filer of return of income for the year under consideration and also not traceable on the registered address. The assessee had received interest income of Rs. 11,17,084/- for the year under consideration. However, the company had shown interest income only Rs. 5,58,542/- in the return of income. Under the circumstances, the assessment for the year 2012-13 of the assessee was sought to be reopened by the revenue by issuing impugned notice dated 30.03.2019 under Section 148 of the Act. 3. The writ applicant filed its return of income in response to the notice issued by the revenue and requested to supply the copy of the reasons recorded for reopening. The same was supplied vide communication dated 12.09.2019. The writ applicant vide letter dated 19.09.2019 raised objections, which came to be disposed of by the revenue vide order dated 04.10.2019. The assessing officer before issuing the aforesaid notice, has recorded the reasons for reopening which reads as under: Reasons recorded :- "1. The assessee company had filed its return of income for A.Y. 2012-13 on 25.09.2012 declaring ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... recorded above. 5. It is pertinent to mention here that in this case the assessee has filed its return of income for the year under consideration but no assessment as stipulated U/s 2(40) of the Act was made and the return of income was only processed U/s 143(1) of the Act . In view of the above, provision of clause (b) of explanation 2 section 147 are applicable to facts of the case and the assessment year under consideration is deemed to be a case where income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. : 6. Further, in this case more than} four year have lapsed from end of the assessment year under consideration. Hence necessary sanction to issue notice U/s 148 is requested for approval from the Pr: Commissioner of Income tax as per the provisions of section 151 of the Act." 4. The writ applicant raised the objections against the issuance of impugned notice and the intention of proceedings mainly on the following grounds: (i) No escapement of income chargeable to tax; (ii) No difference between 'interest income' reflected in Form 26AS and 'interest income' disclosed by the writ applicant; (iii) Reasons lacked validity; (iv) Sanction in terms of Section 151 of the A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to believe is bad in law as the assessing officer recorded his satisfaction only on the basis of the information received from the investigating wing without carrying out his independent enquiries and hence, he assumed jurisdiction only on borrowed satisfaction, which is impermissible in law. 9. As regards the interest income of Rs. 11,17,084/-, it was submitted that the amount as per Form 26AS is factually incorrect and interest income of Rs. 5,58,542/- as reflected in Form 26AS had not disclosed. Therefore, there is no difference between interest income reflected in Form 26AS and interest income disclosed by the assessee company. 10. In view of the aforesaid contentions, learned Sr. Counsel for the writ applicant submitted that reopening of the assessment is therefore without jurisdiction and hence, the impugned notice deserves to be quashed and set aside. 11. On the other hand, Mrs. Mauna Bhatt, the learned Sr. Standing Counsel appearing for the Revenue vehemently opposed the writ application contending that the case of the assessee was reopened on the basis of the information shared by DDIT (Inv.), Mumbai and after receiving the information, the assessing officer made indepe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s from the record that while submitting the objections, the writ applicant had submitted copies of the ledger account of M/s. Harsh Enterprises in the year 2010-11 and 2011-12, the bank statement of Axis Bank Ltd. for the year 2011-12 to show the entries of receipt of money to the tune of Rs. 1,23,89,040/- as well as the copy of the balance-sheet and audited accounts. 16.We have examined para 6.1 of the order disposing off the objections, wherein, no reasons having been assigned so far as the issues raised by the writ applicant with regard to the alleged transaction is concerned. We are of the view that, the Assessing Officer failed to take note of the various objections filed against the reasons recorded. Para 6.1 of the order of disposing off the objections does not reflect proper application of mind to the objections raised by the writ applicant and it could not be said that the objections having been disposed off by passing a reasoned order. 17. In view of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of GKN Divershaft (India) Ltd. Vs. Income tax Officer & Ors. [(2003) 259 ITR 19], while disposing off the objections against the notice issued under Section 148 of the Act, it is a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
