Back
BHARGAV D. KARIA, D. N. RAY
FILCO TRADE CENTRE PRIVATE LIMITED – Appellant
Versus
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
BHARGAV D. KARIA, J.
1. Heard learned Senior Advocate Mr. Tushar Hemani with learned advocate Ms. Vaibhavi K. Parikh for the petitioner and learned Senior Standing Counsel Mr. Varun K. Patel for the respondents.
2. Having regard to the controversy involved in this petition, which is in a narrow compass, with the consent of learned advocates for the respective parties, both the matters are taken up for final hearing.
3. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned Senior standing Counsel Mr. Varun K. Patel waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondents.
4. By these petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the validity and legality of the notices dated 30th March, 2021 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”) for the Assessment Year 2016-17 and Assessment Year 2017-2018.
5.1 The brief case of the case are that the petitioner is a Company engaged in the business of trading of all types of bearings and its allied items.
5.2. The petitioner received the impugned notices. On receipt of the impugned notices, the assessee filed the return of income and also requested for the reasons recorded. The Asse
The Assessing Officer must independently verify information before reopening assessments; reliance on third-party information without application of mind invalidates the reopening process.
Point of Law : Sufficiency of the evidence or material is not open to scrutiny by the Court but the existence of the belief is the sine qua non for a valid exercise of power.
At the time of recording the reason for satisfaction of AO, there should be prima facie some material on the basis of which, the department could reopen the case. The sufficiency or correctness of th....
It is a settled position of law that reopening of case under Section 147 of the act, after expiry of 4 years, cannot be justified unless the income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment by reason ....
It is settled law that, at the stage of Section 148 of the Act, what is required is “reason to believe”, but not the established fact of escapement of income. This aspect has been considered by the A....
Point of law: It is no doubt true that the Court cannot go into the sufficiency or adequacy of the material and substitute its own opinion for that of the Income Tax Officer on the point as to whethe....
Point of Law : Formation of belief by the Assessing Officer at the stage of initiation of action under section 147 of the Act is within the realm of subjective satisfaction.
Information furnished at the time of original assessment, when by subsequent information received from the Principal Director (Investigation), itself found to be controverted, the objection to the no....
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.
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
