| Case ID |
2506c973-258a-43bb-9bb5-99645fef7de8 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Civil Rule No.6491 of 1998 |
| Decision Date |
Mar 16, 2000 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The court quashed the impugned notices under sections 148 and 147 of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 1991-92 due to lack of sufficient evidence of income escaping assessment. The Assessing Officer failed to provide specific information that the transactions made by the assessee were not genuine. The court emphasized that the belief of the Assessing Officer must be based on definite material indicating that income had escaped assessment, which was not established in this case. |
| Summary |
This case involves the reassessment of income tax concerning Eveready Industries India Ltd. The Gauhati High Court addressed the validity of notices issued under sections 147 and 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The case centered on whether the Assessing Officer had sufficient grounds to believe that income had escaped assessment for the assessment year 1991-92. The court found that the Assessing Officer lacked specific evidence linking the payments made by the company to fictitious transactions. Significant amendments to sections 147 and 148 of the Income Tax Act were discussed, emphasizing the need for a prima facie conclusion before reassessment can occur. The decision highlights the importance of adequate evidence and the necessity for the Assessing Officer to demonstrate a rational connection between the evidence and the belief of income escaping assessment. This case is critical for understanding taxpayer rights and the jurisdictional limits of tax authorities. Keywords: Income Tax Act, reassessment, Assessing Officer, genuine transactions, legal precedent. |
| Court |
Gauhati High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
A. K. Patnaik, J
|
| Lawyers |
Dr. Debi Pal,
Dr. A.K. Saraf,
K.K. Gupta,
S.K. Agarwal,
K.P. Sarma,
D. Sur
|
| Petitioners |
EVEREADY INDUSTRIES INDIA LTD
|
| Respondents |
others,
JOINT COMMISSIONER OF Income Tax (ASSESSMENT)
|
| Citations |
2002 SLD 332,
2002 PTD 2040,
(2000) 243 ITR 540
|
| Other Citations |
Bhadarmal Hazarimal v. ITO (1975) 100 ITR 159 (Gauhati),
Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd. v. ITO (1961) 41 ITR 191 (SC),
Chhugamal Rajpal v. S.P. Chaliha (1971) 79 ITR 603 (SC),
Coca-Cola Export Corporation v. ITO (1998) 231 ITR 200 (SC),
CIT v. Bihar Cotton Mills Ltd. (1986) 160 ITR 275 (Patna),
Ganga Saran & Sons (P.) Ltd. v. ITO (1981) 130 ITR 1 (SC),
ITO v. Lakhmani Mewal Das (1976) 103 ITR 437 (SC),
ITO v. Madnani Engineering Works Ltd. (1979) 118 ITR 1 (SC),
Kalyani Mavji & Co. v. CIT (1976) 102 ITR 287 (SC),
Narayanappa (S.) v. CIT (1967) 63 ITR 219 (SC)
|
| Laws Involved |
Income Tax Act, 1961
|
| Sections |
147,
148
|