Back
BHARGAV D. KARIA, NIRAL R. MEHTA
Facets Gems Polishing Works Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1)(1) – 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 learned advocate Mrs. Kalpana K. Raval for the respondent.
2. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned Senior Standing Counsel Mr. Sanghani waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondent.
3. Having regard to the controversy involved which in a narrow compass with the consent of the learned advocates for the respective parties, the matter is taken up for hearing.
4. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the notice dated 19.03.2020 issued under section 148 of the Income Tax Act,1961 [for short ‘the Act’] for A.Y. 2014-15.
5. The petitioner is engaged in the business of manufacturing and cut of polished diamond on job work basis and trading of diamonds and power generation through windmill.
5.1 During the Financial Year 2013-14 relevant to A.Y. 2014-15, the tax audit report of the petitioner contained various disclosures relating to deduction under section 35DD of the Act [i.e. amortization of expenditure in case of amalgamation
The court established that reopening assessments beyond four years requires new information or failure to disclose material facts, which was not present in this case.
Reopening of assessment requires tangible material indicating income has escaped assessment; mere change of opinion is insufficient.
Taxation – Assessment – Deduction of - Claim of assessee for deduction under Section 80IA of Act along with reasons for revising return of income with respect to claim under Section 80IA of Act was b....
Assessee’s objections raised against the reopening proceedings are not acceptable as the case warrants scrutiny on the same lines. Accordingly, the objections so raised are hereby disposed off accord....
Where Assessing Officer has reason to believe that income has escaped assessment, confers jurisdiction to reopen the assessment. Therefore, post1st April, 1989, power to reopen is much wider. However....
A notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act is invalid if issued beyond the limitation period and based on previously available information, constituting a change of opinion.
Reopening of assessments under section 148 requires fresh tangible material; reliance on prior records or audit objections alone is insufficient.
Reopening of assessments under the Income Tax Act requires new material facts; mere change of opinion is insufficient.
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
