| Case ID |
268ffa4e-89b5-4721-81ff-2e03bf185178 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Miscellaneous Civil Case No.338 of 1993 |
| Decision Date |
Oct 31, 1996 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The decision of the Madhya Pradesh High Court examined the legality of the reopening of an assessment under the Indian Income Tax Act, 1961. The court emphasized that the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer must be based on proper reasons and cannot be arbitrary. It was found that the Tribunal's conclusion regarding the Assessing Officer's jurisdiction to reopen the assessment under section 143(2)(b) without recording reasons was a significant question of law that warranted reference. The court directed the Tribunal to state the case and refer question No. 2 regarding the legality of the fresh assessment made by the Assessing Officer without proper reasons. |
| Summary |
This case revolves around an income tax assessment dispute where the petitioner, Shyam Sunder Gupta, contested the reopening of an assessment by the Commissioner of Income Tax. Initially, the assessment was framed under section 143(1) on a returned income of Rs. 13,620. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer invoked section 143(2)(b) and issued a notice leading to a fresh assessment under section 144 due to non-cooperation from the assessee, resulting in an income of Rs. 3,35,000. The appeal to the Commissioner (Appeals) was dismissed, and the Tribunal initially upheld the Assessing Officer's actions, stating that no reasons were required for reopening the assessment. However, the High Court disagreed, highlighting the legal requirement for the Assessing Officer to base their satisfaction on adequate reasons and not arbitrary judgments. This case underscores the importance of due process in tax assessments and the necessity of providing justifications for reopening assessments, ultimately leading to a reference for further legal examination. |
| Court |
Madhya Pradesh High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
R. TIWARI,
N. K. JAIN
|
| Lawyers |
V.S. Samvatsar,
Pathrekar
|
| Petitioners |
SHYAM SUNDER GUPTA
|
| Respondents |
COMMISSIONER OF Income Tax
|
| Citations |
2000 SLD 202,
2000 PTD 448,
(1998) 232 ITR 135
|
| Other Citations |
Parashuratn Pottery Works Co. Ltd. v. ITO (1977) 106 ITR(SC)
|
| Laws Involved |
Indian Income Tax Act, 1961
|
| Sections |
143(1),
143(2)(b),
144,
147,
256(1),
256(2)
|