TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (10) TMI 1582
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r Standing Counsel Mr. Karan Sanghani for the respondent. 2. Having regard to the controversy involved which is in a narrow compass, with the consent of the learned advocates for the respective parties, the matter is taken up for hearing. 3. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned advocate Senior Standing Counsel Mr. Karan Sanghani waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondent. 4. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the jurisdiction of the respondent Assessing Officer to issue notice dated 31.03.2021 under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (For short "the Act") for Assessment Year 2017-2018. 5. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner filed its original re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sulted in underassessment of income of Rs. 3,11,324/-. Thus, there is underassessment of income of Rs. 3,11,324/-. (B) During the year under consideration, the assessee has deposited huge cash deposit and the assessee has not furnished any supporting documents i.e. details of Cash book, Bank Book, unsecured loan, deposit in form of fixed deposits etc during the assessment proceedings, verification to ascertain the source of such cash deposit with respect to their identity, genuineness and creditworthiness and has not satisfactorily proved the genuineness f the deposits by its branch Offices." 12. The petitioner thereafter filed preliminary objections on 07.06.2021 challenging the validity of the notice issued under section 148 of the Act....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....st paid and tax deducted. 18. It was further submitted that the petitioner by reply dated 29.08.2019 furnishing the details about the TDS deducted etc. and after considering the same, the assessment order was passed. 19. It was further submitted that the auditor has reported less deduction of tax and therefore, as per the provisions of section 40 (a) (ia) of the Act, the interest expenses cannot be disallowed for the same. It was therefore, submitted that the impugned notice issued by the respondent is nothing but a mere change of opinion only with a view to make a fishing and roving inquiry which is not permissible. 20. In support of his submission that reassessment is nothing but merely a change of opinion, reliance was placed on the f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of not disposing of the objections would not be tenable. 26. Learned Senior Standing Counsel Mr. Sanghani submitted that the reopening is within the period of four years and therefore, the respondent Assessing Officer was justified to consider the material available on record to form a reasonable belief that the income has escaped assessment. It was pointed out that the respondent Assessing Officer has rightly observed that in view of the reporting made by the auditor of less deduction of tax, there would be disallowance under section 40 (a) (ia) of the Act. 27. Considering the above submissions, it is not in dispute that the petitioner has filed reply to the notice issued under section 142 (1) of the Act during the regular course of ass....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....that income has escaped assessment, confers jurisdiction to re-open the assessment. Therefore, post-1st April, 1989, power to re-open is much wider, However, one needs to give a schematic interpretation to the words "reason to believe" failing which, we are afraid, Section 147 would give arbitrary powers to the Assessing Officer to re-open assessments on the basis of "mere change of opinion", which cannot be per se reason to re-open. We must also keep in mind the conceptual difference between power to review and power to re-assess. The Assessing Officer has no power to review; he has the power to re-assess. But re-assessment has to be based on fulfillment of certain pre-condition and if the concept of "change of opinion" is removed, as cont....