Back
K. R. SHRIRAM, FIRDOSH. P. POONIWALLA
Rajshree Realtors Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Union of India through Secretary, New Delhi – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
K.R. SHRIRAM, J.
1. Petitioner is impugning the notice dated 19th March 2019 issued by respondent no. 3 under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act).
2. Petitioner is engaged in the business of real estate and was regularly assessed to tax. For A.Y.2012-2013, petitioner had filed its return of income on 21st September 2012 declaring an income of Rs.1,05,318/- and had shown the said income under the head “Profit and Gains from Business and Profession”. The return of income was initially processed under Section 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently, petitioner’s case was selected for scrutiny under Computer Aided Scrutiny Selection (CASS) norms and statutory notices under Section 142(1) and 143(2) of the Act were issued to petitioner.
3. During the course of the assessment proceedings, petitioner was, by a letter dated 24th March 2015, called upon to explain huge share application money and share premium received by petitioner. Petitioner by its letters dated 14th November 2014, 27th February 2015 and 27th March 2015 replied and also provided all documents. Petitioner
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the belief to be based on reasonable grounds and the need for the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts neces....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the receipt of share premium on the issue of fresh shares is on the capital account and constitutes a capital receipt, not chargeable to tax u....
Point of Law : Assessment - Unless any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for such assessment year by reason o f the failure on the part of the assesse to disclose fully and truly all ma....
The function of the assessing authority at this stage is to administer the statute and what is required is a reason to believe and not to establish fact of escapement of income and therefore, looking....
The court established that there must be tangible material justifying the reopening of an assessment, and the assessing officer must have a reason to believe that income had escaped assessment.
Reopening of assessment beyond four years without failure to disclose material facts is invalid; share premium treated as capital receipt not taxable under Section 68 prior to 2013 amendment.
Reopening of assessment under Section 148 is impermissible if it is based on previously examined issues without new material.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the re-opening of a concluded assessment cannot be based on a mere change of opinion by the Assessing Officer, and the duty of the assessee is....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
