Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
G. S. KULKARNI, ADVAIT M. SETHNA, JJ
Crystal Pride Developers – Appellant
Versus
Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner is a registered partnership firm (Para 4) |
| 2. original return filed declaring loss (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. respondent issued demand notice (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. petitioner's counsel argues against reopening (Para 12) |
| 5. petitioner claims no change of opinion (Para 13 , 14) |
| 6. petitioner argues against internal audit basis (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 22) |
| 7. respondents argue for maintainability (Para 21) |
| 8. respondents claim no opinion formed (Para 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28) |
| 9. court discusses reopening validity (Para 29 , 30 , 31) |
| 10. court notes failure to follow procedure (Para 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39) |
| 11. court rules on reopening assessment (Para 40 , 41 , 42) |
| 12. writ petition succeeds (Para 43 , 44) |
JUDGMENT :
1. Rule, made returnable forthwith. Respondents waive service. Heard finally with the consent of the parties.
2. The pivotal issue for consideration is whether the assessment order dated 29 March 2022 (“impugned order” for short) read with the notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“IT Act” for short) dated 27 March 2021 (“impugned notice” for short), reopening the assessment of the petitioner under Section 147 read w
Reopening of assessment beyond four years without fresh tangible material or proper disposal of objections is illegal under the Income Tax Act.
Reopening of assessment under the Income Tax Act after four years is impermissible without failure to disclose material facts; mere change of opinion does not justify such action.
Reopening of assessment under the Income Tax Act requires tangible material; mere change of opinion is insufficient for reassessment.
Reopening of assessment under the Income Tax Act requires tangible new material; mere change of opinion is insufficient.
The Court should be guided by the reasons recorded for the reassessment and not by the reasons or explanation given by the Assessing Officer at a later stage in respect of the notice of reassessment.....
The court emphasized the need for tangible material to believe that income had escaped assessment and held that the power to grant approval for re-opening an assessment is coupled with a duty and can....
It is well settled that the validity of the notice of reopening would be judged on basis of reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer for issuance of such notice. It would not be permissible for the ....
Reopening of assessment under Section 148 is invalid if based on materials already available during the original assessment, constituting a mere change of opinion without fresh evidence.
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
