| Case ID |
0037834b-2180-4d48-8ce8-d976edc10b2d |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
IT APPEAL NO 1056 OF 2009 |
| Decision Date |
Apr 27, 2010 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The appeal by the Revenue was directed against the order passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal regarding the assessment year 1998-99. The core issue was the validity of proceedings under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal found that the Assessing Officer did not independently form a belief that income had escaped assessment and merely acted on directions from higher authorities. This lack of independent reasoning rendered the reassessment invalid. The Tribunal's decision to quash the reassessment was upheld as the reasons provided by the Assessing Officer were insufficient and did not demonstrate a genuine belief in the escapement of income. |
| Summary |
This case involves an appeal regarding the reopening of an assessment under the Income-tax Act, 1961, specifically focusing on the validity of the Assessing Officer's actions. The Delhi High Court examined whether the Assessing Officer had formed an independent belief about income escaping assessment based on information received from the Deputy Director of Income-tax (Investigation). It was determined that the reasons provided by the Assessing Officer were merely directives and did not constitute a valid basis for reassessment. The Tribunal's ruling emphasized the importance of the Assessing Officer's duty to independently assess information before taking action. This case highlights the need for clear and substantial reasons when invoking sections 147 and 148 of the Income-tax Act, ensuring fair treatment of taxpayers. Key phrases include 'income escaping assessment', 'reopening of assessment', and 'validity of proceedings', which are vital in tax law discussions. |
| Court |
Delhi High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Sfil Stock Broking Ltd.,
R.K. Aggarwal and Company
|
| Judges |
Badar Durrez Ahmed,
V.K. Jain
|
| Lawyers |
Sanjeev Sabharwal,
Ajay Vohra,
Ms. Kavita Jha,
Sriram Krishna
|
| Petitioners |
Commissioner of Income Tax
|
| Respondents |
Sfil Stock Broking Ltd.
|
| Citations |
2010 SLD 1733,
(2010) 325 ITR 285
|
| Other Citations |
Central Provinces Manganese Ore Co. Ltd. v. ITO [1991] 191 ITR 662 (Delhi),
CIT v. Atul Jain[2008] 299 ITR 383 (Delhi),
CIT v. Batra Bhatta Co. [2010] 321 ITR 526 (Delhi),
Asst. CIT v. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd. [2007] 291 ITR 500 (SC),
ITO v. Selected Dalurband Coal Co. Pvt. Ltd. [1996] 217 ITR 597 (SC),
Jay Bharat Maruti Ltd. v. CIT [2010] 324 ITR 289 (Delhi),
Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. v. ITO [1999] 236 ITR 34 (SC)
|
| Laws Involved |
Income-tax Act, 1961
|
| Sections |
147,
148
|