Back
DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, KAMAL KHATA
Chanchal Bhagwatilal Gokhru – Appellant
Versus
Union of India, through Secretary, Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue, Room No. 46, North Block New Delhi – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Kamal Khata, J.
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Respondents Counsel waives service.
2. By this Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the Petitioner seeks a Writ of Mandamus to quash and set aside the impugned notice dated 26th March 2021 under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) whereby the Respondent No. 2 proposed to reopen the assessment of the Petitioner for the Assessment Year (“AY”) 2014-15 as he had reason to believe that income chargeable to tax had escaped Assessment and all subsequent proceedings to the impugned notice.
BRIEF FACTS:
3. The Petitioner had filed her return of income for AY 2014-15 on 28th July 2014. The Assessing Officer (“AO”) had passed an order u/s 143 (3) of the Act on 18th November 2016, whereby he added Rs. 1,07,18,922 to the total income on account of withdrawal of exemption claimed by the Petitioner u/s 10(38) of the Act and the Petitioner paid tax on the same. Thereafter, the Petitioner was also granted waiver of penalty for the AY 2014-15 on 31st January 2018 on application u/s 273A of the Act by the PCIT-18, Mumbai.
4. Evidently a notice u/s 148 of the Act dated 26th March 2021 is issued after a period of f
The true test of income chargeable to tax escaping assessment is whether there exists fresh 'tangible material' on the basis of which appropriate conclusion is reached.
The court established that reopening assessments requires a clear and valid reason to believe that income has escaped assessment, which was not present in this case.
Re-assessment under the Income-tax Act cannot be initiated after four years without specific allegations of failure to disclose material facts necessary for assessment.
The Assessing Officer's jurisdiction under section 147 of the Act has to be tested on the basis of the reasons recorded, and the reassessment proceedings cannot be based on a mere change of opinion w....
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.
Re-assessment under the Income Tax Act cannot occur after 4 years without specific allegations of non-disclosure of material facts.
Reassessment cannot be based on a change of opinion, and the duty of the assessee is to disclose fully and truly all primary relevant facts.
Reopening of assessment under Section 148 requires clear, independent reasoning demonstrating income has escaped assessment, which was not satisfied in this case.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the jurisdictional conditions for invoking section 147 – 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 must be satisfied, and there should be no failure to ....
The Assessing Officer must establish the jurisdictional requirement for reopening and cannot rely solely on information without verifying if the issue had been disclosed during the original assessmen....
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
