9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (5) TMI 247X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt company is engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of Drilling Rigs and Spares. For the assessment year 2003-2004, return of income was submitted and the assessment was completed on 28.03.2005. Subsequently, on 01.02.2010, a notice was issued by the Assessing Officer under Section 148 of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act) by stating that he has reasons to believe that income chargeable to tax had escape assessment. In response, the appellant submitted their return of income on 24.02.2010 and sought the reasons for reopening the assessment. The reasons for reopening the assessment were also communicated to the appellant by a letter dated 05.03.2010. In response, the appellant submitted a letter dated 03.05.2010 objecting ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rtains to the Assessment Year 2003-2004, the respondent is directed to pass such re-assessment order, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Needless to state, before such re-assessment order is passed, the petitioner shall be heard in accordance with law. 31. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed." 4. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that in the return of income filed on 27.11.2003 for the assessment year 2003-2004, the appellant disclosed the payment of Rs.10 crores made to M/s. Atlas Copco India Limited towards non-compete fee and it was duly reflected in the profit and loss account. Subsequently, duri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s Copco India Limited for cancellation of noncompete/ non-solicitation agreements and termination of related rights. While so, the learned Judge ought to have allowed the writ petition by setting aside the order impugned in the writ petition and accordingly he prayed for allowing this appeal. 5. On the above contention, the learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondent would contend that in the order dated 15.12.2010, which was impugned in the writ petition, the assessing officer has clearly stated that the non-disclosure of certain material facts fully and truly is a failure on the part of the appellant-assesee and it warrants re-assessment. In other words, it was clearly stated that the assessee has not disclosed the true intention ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt to pass re-assessment order, in accordance with law. 8. Having regard to the above stated position, this court, in order to provide an opportunity to the appellant and also in the interest of justice, is inclined to set aside the order of the learned Judge in the writ petition as well as the order of the respondent rejecting the objection filed by the appellant for reopening the assessment and are acco6rdingly set aside, in the following terms: (i) The appellant is directed to submit all the material evidence along with additional objection meeting out the proposal raised by the respondent/Assessing Authority for reopening the assessment under Section 148 of the Act, before the respondent, within a period of two weeks from the date of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
