IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, KAMAL KHATA, JJ.
Hindoostan Mills Limited – Petitioner
Versus
Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai – Respondent
Writ Petition No. 1410 of 2022
Decided On : 27-06-2023
Income Tax Act - Notice u/s 148 - AY 2014-15 - Section 147, Section 72A(2) - The court quashed the notice and order as it was based on a change of opinion and not on the grounds of income escaping assessment.
Fact of the Case:
The petition challenges a notice issued under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for Assessment Year 2014-15 and the order disposing of the objections raised for reassessment.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that there was no failure to disclose material facts and that the notice and order were based on a change of opinion, which is impermissible.
Issues: The issues revolved around the validity of the notice and order issued under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for Assessment Year 2014-15.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the notice and order were based on a change of opinion and not on the grounds of income escaping assessment, which led to quashing of the same.
Final Decision: The court quashed the notice and order issued for AY 2014-15 and prohibited further action in respect thereof.
JUDGMENT :
KAMAL KHATA, J.
1. This Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution filed on 2nd March 2022 impugns notice dated 30th March 2021 issued under section (u/s) 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act) for Assessment Year (AY) 2014-15 and the order dated 14th February 2022 disposing of the objections raised for reassessment.
2. The record indicates that the notice dated 30th March 2021 u/s 148 of the Act is issued after expiry of four years and the proviso to section 147 of the Act applies. Respondents have to show there was failure to truly and fully disclose material facts as decided by this Court in Ananta Landmark (P) Ltd. vs. DCIT CC 5(3) Mumbai, (2021) 131 Taxmann.com 52.
3. We have examined the reasons for initiation of proceedings u/s 147 of the Act annexed to the Petition that are evidently premised on the statement ‘It is seen from the case records.” The Assessment Officer (AO) recorded that:
It is seen from the case records of AY-2011-12 that, the total ‘carry forward’, claimed by the assessee during AY 2011-12 was of 88,20,53,360, which was Rs. 5,63,29,331 (to the extent of income) claimed after ‘set off’ of ‘brought forward’ losses of 95,39, Rs. 5,63,29,331 (to the extent of income) 09,867 (incorrectly claimed as 95,39,99,867). This loss included ‘business loss’ of 93,40,99,039 i.e. Rs. 5,63,29,331 (to the extent of income) total of (55,82,30,163 for AY 2003-04 and Rs. 5,63,29,331 (to the extent of income) 37,58,68,876 for AY 2004-05) pertaining to the Rs. 5,63,29,331 (to the extent of income) amalgamated unit M/s. The Hindoostan Spinning and Weaving Mills Ltd.
(a) Further it is seen from the order u/s 263 dated 21st March 2016, the Pr. CIT had directed the Assessing Officer to verify the fact existing in the case of ‘amalgamating’ as well as ‘amalgamated company’ with reference to the conditions laid down in Section 72A(2)(a).
(b) of the Act and decide about the allowable ‘carry forward’ and ‘set off’ of accumulated loss and unabsorbed depreciation allowance of Hindoostan Spinning and Weaving Mills Ltd. in the amalgamated company. On the basis of this order, case was reopened for AY 2011-12 and order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act was passed on 27th December 2016 wherein vide para 6.3 the assessing officer has concluded that as per section 72A(2) of the Act, the losses on amalgamation get fresh life for further 8 years from the date of amalgamation.
Thus, it is simply clear from the reading of 72A(2) of the Act that, though the ‘carried forward’ losses of amalgamated company will become the loss of amalgamated company in the year of amalgamation, but other provisions of the Act (viz. ‘carry forward’ of a maximum period of 8 years) will apply accordingly. Hence the amalgamated company will be entitled for the claim for only the unexpired period and not full 8 years afresh. Hence the assessee is not entitled for set off of losses of M/s The Hindoostan Spinning and Weaving Mills for AY 2003-04 and AY 2004-05 as it has exceeded the period of carry forward of 8 years as prescribed in Section 72(3) of the Act....”
4. Upon examination of the recorded reasons, we find nothing to indicate failure to disclose any material fact. Upon examining the order u/s 143(3) r.w.s 263 of the Act, we find that the AO has considered all submissions and documents and accepted the Loss of 88,07,62,670/- to be carried Rs. 5,63,29,331 (to the extent of income) forward. Furthermore, with regard to section 72A(2) of the Act, he held that the losses on the amalgamated assessee company are carried forward and on amalgamation ge
The main legal point established is that a notice for reassessment cannot be based on a change of opinion but must be grounded on the grounds of income escaping assessment.
The judgment established the importance of tangible material and the prohibition of a mere change of opinion in the exercise of power under section 147 of the Income Tax Act.
The court emphasized the importance of complying with the statutory pre-conditions for re-opening assessments and the necessity for the Assessing Officer to have an independent 'reason to believe' th....
Failure to disclose material facts is a key consideration in the validity of notices issued under section 148 of the Income Tax Act.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that reassessment proceedings must be based on tangible material and cannot be initiated solely on the basis of a 'change of opinion' without fresh....
The court emphasized the importance of considering the contentions of the petitioner and maintaining consistency in decisions under the Income Tax Act.
Proceedings under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 are for the benefit of the revenue and not the assessee, and the assessee cannot be permitted to take advantage of the reassessment proceedin....
The court upheld the authority of the Assessing Officer to reassess income under amended provisions of the Income Tax Act, reinforcing that objections can be addressed during reassessment proceedings....
Point of Law : Court satisfied that there was prima facie material available on record before the assessing officer for issuing a notice for reassessment and the notice under Section 148.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.