| Case ID |
1f43d578-dac0-4f8f-bfd2-03950fb5ac4c |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
D-2741 of 2001 |
| Decision Date |
Dec 01, 2003 |
| Hearing Date |
May 29, 2001 |
| Decision |
The Uttaranchal High Court ruled that the notices issued under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for reopening the assessment of the Oil & Natural Gas Corporation were invalid. The court found that the conditions for reassessment had not been satisfied as the petitioner had fully disclosed all material facts necessary for the assessment. The court emphasized that reopening of assessments after four years is permissible only under specific conditions, which were not met in this case. The assessment years in question were from 1991-92 to 1994-95, and the court concluded that the reasons for reopening were based on a mere change of opinion by the Assessing Officer. Therefore, the impugned notices were quashed. |
| Summary |
In this landmark case, the Uttaranchal High Court addressed the validity of reopening assessments under the Income-tax Act, 1961. The case involved the Oil & Natural Gas Corporation, which faced reassessment notices for the years 1991-92 to 1994-95. The court held that the Assessing Officer's actions were unjustified due to a lack of new material facts, emphasizing that the petitioner had fully disclosed all necessary information during the original assessments. This decision highlights the importance of proper disclosure and the strict conditions under which assessments can be reopened after the four-year limit, making it a significant ruling in tax law. Keywords such as 'Income-tax Act', 'reopening assessments', and 'tax law' are relevant for understanding the implications of this case. |
| Court |
Uttaranchal High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Deputy Commissioner of Income tax,
Oil & Natural Gas Corpn. Ltd.
|
| Judges |
Irshad Hussain,
M.M. Ghilidiyal
|
| Lawyers |
S.E. Dastur,
S.K. Posti
|
| Petitioners |
Oil & Natural Gas Corpn. Ltd.
|
| Respondents |
Deputy Commissioner of Income tax
|
| Citations |
2003 SLD 3724 = (2003) 262 ITR 648
|
| Other Citations |
Parashuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd. v. ITO [1977] 106 ITR 1 (SC),
Mecdermott International Inc. v. Addl. CIT [2003] 259 ITR 138 (Uttaranchal),
CIT v. Hotel Savera [1999] 239 ITR 795 / 102 Taxman 247 (Mad.),
Shree Digvijay Cement Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1982] 138 ITR 45 / 9 Taxman 113 (Guj.),
CIT v. Indian Bank Ltd. [1965] 56 ITR 77 (SC),
Rajasthan State Warehousing Corpn. v. CIT [2000] 242 ITR 450/ 109 Taxman 145 (SC),
Indo-Aden Salt Mfg. & Trading Co. (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [1986] 159 ITR 624/ 25 Taxman 356 (SC),
Kantamani Venkata Narayana & Sons v. First Addl. ITO, Rajahmundry [1967] 63 ITR 638 (SC),
CIT v. Miss Esther (P.) Carvalho [1999] 237 ITR 549 / 107 Taxman 8(Bom.),
Zohar Siraj Lokhandwala v. M.G. Kamat, Asstt. CIT [1994] 210 ITR 956 / 77 Taxman 302 (Bom.),
CIT v. T.S. Pl. P. Chidambaram Chettiar [1971] 80 ITR 467 (SC),
Seth Kishori Lal Babulal v. CIT [1963] 49 ITR 502 (All.)
|
| Laws Involved |
Income-tax Act, 1961
|
| Sections |
147,
148,
143(3)
|