IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
M.S. Sonak, Jitendra Jain, JJ
Glaxo Smith Kline Pharmaceuticals Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(1)(1) & – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Jitendra Jain, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. Rule. Rule made returnable immediately at the request and with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties.
3. This petition challenges a notice under section 148 of the Income -tax Act, 1961 (the Act) dated 30 March 2021 for the assessment year 2013-14.
4. The petitioner filed its return of income on 30 November 2013. The said return was selected for scrutiny assessment and the petitioner in the course of the assessment proceedings, pursuant to various queries raised by the assessing officer, filed various details, including the details on which the impugned proceedings are initiated.
5. On 22 February 2017, an assessment order under section 143(3) of the Act was passed disallowing certain percentage of expenses on samples given to doctors on the ground that same constitutes sale promotion expenses incurred on the doctor. The said order is a subject matter of an appeal. We are informed that the said appeal is pending as of today.
6. On 30 March 2021, impugned notice under section 148 of the Act was issued for reopening the case calling upon the Petitioner to file its return of income since the assessing offi




Reassessment notices under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act cannot be issued after four years unless there is a failure to disclose material facts, which was not established in this case.
Reopening of income assessment under Section 148 is impermissible without fresh material and cannot be based on previously examined issues under Section 263.
Reopening of assessment under Section 148 is impermissible if the issues were previously examined under Section 263 without fresh material.
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.
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.
Re-assessment under the Income Tax Act cannot occur after 4 years without specific allegations of non-disclosure of material facts.
Reopening of assessments under the Income Tax Act requires new material facts; mere change of opinion is insufficient.
Reopening of assessment under Section 148 requires valid reasons; mere incorrect information cannot justify such action.
Re-opening of assessment under Section 148 requires failure to disclose material facts; absence of such allegation invalidates the notice.
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....
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.