Facts of the
Case
The petitioner challenged a notice dated 27 March
2018 issued under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 seeking to reopen the
assessment for Assessment Year 2011-12.
The petitioner contended that the income sought to
be taxed had already been assessed in the previous year, Assessment Year
2010-11, and that all material facts were already available with the Assessing
Officer. It was submitted that the reopening was based on the same material and
therefore amounted to a change of opinion.
The reasons recorded for reopening indicated that
search and seizure operations were conducted in the case of the Spaze Group,
during which statements were recorded revealing that M/s JMD International was
being used as a conduit for providing bogus billing and accommodation entries.
Records showed payments made by M/s JMD International to the petitioner during
the relevant period.
Issues
Involved
Whether the Assessing Officer had
valid “reason to believe” that income had escaped assessment.
Whether reopening was barred on
the ground of change of opinion.
Whether availability of books of accounts
at the time of original processing precluded reopening.
Whether reassessment is
permissible where the original return was processed under Section 143(1).
Petitioner’s
Arguments
The petitioner argued that sales advances received
had already been subjected to tax in the earlier assessment year and therefore
could not be taxed again. It was contended that all relevant material and
explanations were available with the Assessing Officer at the time of
processing the return for Assessment Year 2011-12.
It was further submitted that reopening on the
basis of material already on record amounted to a mere change of opinion and
was therefore invalid in law.
Respondent’s
Arguments
The Revenue submitted that tangible material
emanating from search proceedings revealed that M/s JMD International was
engaged in providing bogus billing and accommodation entries and that payments
were made to the petitioner during the relevant financial year.
It was contended that the original return for
Assessment Year 2011-12 had only been processed under Section 143(1) and no
assessment under Section 143(3) had been framed. Consequently, the doctrine of
change of opinion was inapplicable.
Court Order
/ Findings
The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition
and upheld the validity of the notice issued under Section 148. The Court held
that:
The reasons recorded disclosed
tangible material providing a live link to the belief that income chargeable to
tax had escaped assessment.
Not all receipts from M/s JMD
International were taxed in Assessment Year 2010-11, and prima facie, certain
receipts pertained to the subsequent year.
Processing of a return under
Section 143(1) does not amount to an assessment in the strict sense.
Where no assessment under Section
143(3) has been framed, the doctrine of change of opinion has no application.
The Court relied upon settled principles that
reassessment is permissible where the original return was only processed under
Section 143(1).
Important
Clarification
The Court clarified that:
Nothing stated in the judgment
shall be construed as an opinion on the merits of the reassessment to be
framed.
Observations were confined solely
to examining the validity of the reopening notice and the existence of “reason
to believe”.
This judgment reinforces the principle that
reassessment is legally sustainable where fresh tangible material exists and
the original return was merely processed under Section 143(1).
Link to download the order - https://www.mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1770194952_RPFOAMHOMEPLTD.VsASSISTANTCOMMISSIONEROFINCOMETAX.pdf
Disclaimer
This content is shared strictly for general information and
knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information
from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or
advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability
arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the
assistance of AI tools.
0 Comments
Leave a Comment