Back
ANITA SUMANTH
EIH Associated Hotels Ltd. , Represented by Power of Attorney Holder J. Suresh, Chennai – Appellant
Versus
Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai – Respondent
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the entire records of the Respondent contained in impugned Notice No.ITBA/AST/F/17/2018- 19/1015381247(1) dated 21.03.2019 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as the Act] for PAN:AAACE2125M for Assessment Year 2012-13 along with all consequential orders issued thereto, including the order dated 31.07.2019, dismissing the objections of the petitioner for re-opening the assessment under Section 147 of the Act, and to quash the same, as arbitrary, unjust and illegal, and to consequently forbear the respondent or any of its superiors, subordinates, agents or any other person claiming under or above the respondent, form in any manner re-assessing the petitioner’s income for the assessment year 2012-13 under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.)
1. The petitioner is a company assessed to income tax on the file of the sole respondent in terms of the provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘Act’). In respect of assessment year (AY) 2012-13 a return of income had been filed disclosing income both
The court emphasized the importance of complying with the statutory pre-conditions for re-opening assessments and the necessity for the Assessing Officer to have an independent 'reason to believe' th....
A defective return cannot be regarded as an invalid return.
Taxation - Re-opening of Assessment - It is not conclusive and it is open for petitioner to meet of points before respondent by participating in the proceeding and persuade the respondent Income Tax ....
The judgment established the importance of tangible material and the prohibition of a mere change of opinion in the exercise of power under section 147 of 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.
Mere change of opinion is not a ground for reopening of assessment under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Reassessment under Section 147 after four years requires proof of failure to disclose material facts, which was not demonstrated in this case.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that reassessment proceedings must be based on tangible material and cannot be initiated solely on the basis of a 'change of opinion' without fresh....
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
