The Tax Publishers2017 TaxPub(DT) 1260 (Mum-Trib)

 

Manjula H. Kanuga v. Dy. CIT

 

INCOME TAX ACT, 1961

--Reassessment--Reopening beyond four yearsNo satisfaction recorded by competent authority----Where CIT accorded sanction to reopening of assessment beyond four years by simply putting 'approved' and signing the report, however, not recording a satisfaction note even in brief, there was clear non-application of mind on the part of competent authority under section 151 and therefore, reassessment was set aside.--AO received information as to assessee being beneficiary of entry operators and reopened the assessment beyond expiry of four years from the end of relevant assessment year. Assessee challenged reopening on the ground that CIT had not applied his mind while according sanction to reopening of assessment. Held: In the instant case, it was evident from perusal of the order sheet that the Commissioner had simply put 'approved' and signed the report thereby giving sanction to AO. Nowhere the Commissioner has recorded a satisfaction note not even in brief. Therefore, it could not be said that the Commissioner had accorded sanction after applying his mind and after recording his satisfaction. Hence, reassessment was set aside.

Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 147

Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 151(1)

Relied:Chhugamal Rajpal v. S.P. Chaliha & Ors. (1971) 79 ITR 603 (SC) and United Electrical Co. (P) Ltd. v. CIT (2002) 258 ITR 317 (Del).

SUBSCRIBE TaxPublishers.inSUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT

TaxPublishers.in

'Kedarnath', 7, Avadh Vihar, Near Nirali Dhani,

Chopasni Road

Jodhpur - 342 008 (Rajasthan) INDIA

Phones : 9785602619 (11 am - 5 pm)

E-Mail : mail@taxpublishers.in / mail.taxpublishers@gmail.com