2022 (3) TMI 786

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... erial facts is only to escape the restrictions provided under Section 147 of the Act. In effect there has been no failure to disclose. We say this because the reasons for re-opening expressly provides that income to the extent of ₹ 138,90,74,595/- has to be assessed because petitioner by virtue of an order dated 27th March, 2014 has become ineligible for exemption under Section 11 of the Act with effect from 1st April, 2002. It is not alleged that petitioner had actually failed to disclose any material fact. We are afraid we cannot agree with the submissions of the Revenue in as much as proviso to Section 147 of the Act expressly makes it clear that there is bar in re-opening the assessment after expiry of four years from the end o .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ng petitioner s total income at ₹ 82,53,57,000/-. Petitioner was disallowed deduction under Section 11 of the Act in the assessment order. Petitioner challenged disallowance from denial of deduction before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (CIT (A)) who allowed the appeal. Aggrieved by the order of CIT (A) respondent filed appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The ITAT dismiss Revenue s appeal and Revenue carried the matter to this court. This court upheld the order of the ITAT and consequently petitioner was granted deduction under Section 11 of the Act. 4. Thereafter, petitioner received a notice dated 29th March, 2014 under Section 148 of the Act which is impugned in this petition. Petitioner was provide .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ons provided under Section 147 of the Act. In effect there has been no failure to disclose. We say this because the reasons for re-opening expressly provides that income to the extent of ₹ 138,90,74,595/- has to be assessed because petitioner by virtue of an order dated 27th March, 2014 has become ineligible for exemption under Section 11 of the Act with effect from 1st April, 2002. It is not alleged that petitioner had actually failed to disclose any material fact. 7. Mr. Suresh Kumar made an attempt to justify re-opening but submitted that on the basis of new and additional facts like cancellation of registration under Section 12A and 12AA of the Act belief can be formed that some income has escaped assessment and the same can be .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X