Back
BHARGAV D. KARIA, NIRAL R. MEHTA
Om Sai Metals – Appellant
Versus
Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Navsari Cirlce – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
BHARGAV D. KARIA, J.
1. Heard learned Senior Advocate Mr. Tushar Hemani with learned advocate Ms. Vaibhavi Parikh for the petitioner and learned Senior Standing Counsel Mr. Karan Sanghani for the respondent.
2. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (For short “the Act”) dated 04.05.2020 issued by the respondent for the Assessment Year 2015- 2016.
3. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned Senior Standing Counsel Mr. Karan Sanghani waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondent.
4. Having regard to the controversy involved which is in narrow compass, with the consent of the learned advocates for the parties, the matter is taken up for hearing.
5. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner which is a partnership firm is engaged in the business of stone quarry and filed return of income for the year under consideration on 18.09.2015 declaring total income at Rs. 82,14,560/-.
5.1 The survey action under section 133A of the Act was carried out on 09.02.2016 and certain material was impounded as per which, total cash sale for the year under consideration was
Reopening of assessment under section 148 requires new tangible material; reliance on previously considered facts constitutes a change of opinion, which is impermissible.
Reopening of income tax assessments requires new tangible material; mere change of opinion is insufficient.
Reopening of assessment under the Income Tax Act requires tangible new material; mere change of opinion is insufficient.
Reopening of assessments under the Income Tax Act requires new material facts; mere change of opinion is insufficient.
Under section 147 of the Act the proceedings for the reassessment can be initiated only if the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for any....
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.
The Assessing Officer must have tangible evidence linking the taxpayer to alleged income escape for valid reassessment under the Income Tax Act; mere suspicion is insufficient.
Reopening of assessment requires tangible material indicating income has escaped assessment; mere change of opinion is insufficient.
Reopening of assessment under the Income Tax Act requires fresh tangible information; reliance on previously available data constitutes a change of opinion, which is impermissible.
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
