9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (1) TMI 128X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... from the financial years 1992-93 to 1998-99 progressively. The assessee has shown investment made by him in the construction of a house in the books of account for each year. The total construction cost according to the books of account of the assessee came to be Rs. 16,21,484. For the first time, during the assessment year 1997-98, the Income-tax Officer referred the question about valuation of property under construction to the Departmental Valuation Officer because the assessee has not produced the valuation report from an approved valuer about the house under construction. On the basis of the report of the Departmental Valuation Officer, proceedings for reassessment were initiated for the assessment years 1993-94, 1994-95 and 1996-97. B ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n opinion. It is, however, true that the opinion about escapement of income from tax must be of the Assessing Officer alone and of none else. It is also trite to say that the sufficiency or adequacy of material on the basis of which such opinion is formed cannot be a ground for formation of reason to believe. At the same time, it is equally true that the material on the basis of which such opinion is framed must have some relevant nexus with the formation of opinion about escapement of income from tax. The opinion cannot be formed on non-existent material or wholly irrelevant and extraneous material. To that extent exercise of jurisdiction by the Assessing Officer is justiciable, apart from the question of limitation within which such juris ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ial available with the Tribunal and does not give rise to a question of law. It is obvious that the BSR rates of 1998 can have no relevant bearing on assessment of investment made for the financial year relevant to the assessment year 1996-97 and earlier years. 9. In these circumstances, the formation of belief by the Assessing Officer about the underdisclosure of investment in construction of the house being founded on no material, the Tribunal was right in holding that the initiation of reassessment proceedings were without jurisdiction. 10. That being the case, in our opinion, in the facts and circumstances, no substantial question of law arises for consideration in this appeal. 11. The appeal, therefore, fails and is hereby dismissed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
