Back
BHARGAV D. KARIA, D. N. RAY
MEHSANA URBAN CO-OP. BANK LTD. – Appellant
Versus
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GANDHINAGAR – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
D.N. RAY, J.
1. Heard learned advocate Mr. B.S. Soparkar for the petitioner and learned advocate Senior Standing Counsel Mr. Karan Sanghani for the respondent.
2. Having regard to the controversy involved which is in a narrow compass, with the consent of the learned advocates for the respective parties, the matter is taken up for hearing.
3. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned advocate Senior Standing Counsel Mr. Karan Sanghani waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondent.
4. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the jurisdiction of the respondent Assessing Officer to issue notice dated 31.03.2021 under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (For short “the Act”) for Assessment Year 2017-2018.
5. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner filed its original return of income for Assessment Year 2017-2018 on 25.10.2017 declaring total income of Rs.80,14,73,480/-.
6. Pursuant to return of income being processed, notice under section 142(1) of the Act was issued upon the petitioner on 19.06.2019 seeking information.
7. The petitioner filed a detailed reply dated 29.08.2019 to the aforesaid notice.
8. The As
The Assessing Officer cannot reopen an assessment based solely on previously considered material, as this constitutes a mere change of opinion, which is impermissible under the Income Tax Act.
The Assessing Officer must establish the jurisdictional requirement for reopening and cannot rely solely on information without verifying if the issue had been disclosed during the original assessmen....
The reopening of tax assessment based on previously considered issues constitutes a change of opinion and is fundamentally invalid without new, tangible evidence.
The jurisdiction to re-open an assessment under the Income Tax Act requires tangible material indicating income has escaped assessment, and cannot be based solely on a change of opinion.
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....
Reopening of assessment under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act is impermissible if based solely on a change of opinion without new evidence.
The power to reopen assessments under Section 147 of the IT Act is much wider post-1st April, 1989, but must be based on tangible material and have a live link with the formation of belief.
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 requires tangible new material; mere change of opinion is insufficient.
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....
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
