The Tax Publishers2019 TaxPub(DT) 0289 (SC)

INCOME TAX ACT, 1961

Section 261 Section 147 r/w Sections 56(2) (vii a) & 148

Where the assessee preferred SLP to appeal against the judgment of Delhi High Court in Sonia Gandhi v. Asstt. CIT & Ors. [W.P. (C) Nos. 8293, 8482, 8483 of 2018 & Ors., dt. 10-9-2018] : 2018 TaxPub(DT) 5844 (Del), whereby the High Court held that entire premise of the reassessment notices in this case is that the non-disclosure of the taxing event, i.e., allotment of shares (and absence of any declaration as to value) deprived AO of opportunity to look into records that in the case of Mr. RG, no doubt, assessment originally completed, was under section 143(3), that had he disclosed in his returns or any related documents about event (share acquisition) primary fact would have been on record; AO's subsequent action in pursuing that aspect or letting go off it, after inquiry might well have justified charge of a second and impermissible opinion on the same subject, however, that was not the case that tax evasion petition and investigation reports of subsequent vintage (after completion of assessment of Mr. RG), therefore, constituted tangible material justified reassessment in view of foregoing discussion and conclusions, the Supreme Court observed : (i) that assessment order was passed by AO, pursuant to court's order dated 4-12-2018 Sonia Gandhi v. Asstt. CIT & Ors. [Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 28627/2018, dt. 4-12-2018] : 2018 TaxPub(DT) 7737 (SC), (ii) that since CBDT Circulars No. 2/2019, dated 4-1-2019 and No. 10/2018, dated 31-12-2018 referred to by Mr. P Chidmbaram, Sr. Advocate, are not part of record, he was granted one week's time to file affidavit along with documents (iii) that the Registry was directed to list the matter on 29-1-2019. (iv) that the interim order passed on 4-12-2018 to continue in the meantime.

Appeal (Supreme Court) - Special leave petition - Reassessment - Validity of notice under section 148--Tangible material--Inquiry after scrutiny assessment

Assessee preferred SLP to appeal against the judgment of Delhi High Court in Sonia Gandhi v. Asstt. CIT & Ors. [W.P. (C) Nos. 8293, 8482, 8483 of 2018 & Ors., dt. 10-9-2018] : 2018 TaxPub(DT) 5844 (Del), whereby the High Court held that entire premise of the reassessment notices in this case is that the non-disclosure of the taxing event, i.e., allotment of shares (and absence of any declaration as to value) deprived AO of opportunity to look into records that in the case of Mr. RG, no doubt, assessment originally completed, was under section 143(3), that had he disclosed in his returns or any related documents about event (share acquisition) primary fact would have been on record; AO's subsequent action in pursuing that aspect or letting go off it, after inquiry might well have justified charge of a second and impermissible opinion on the same subject, however, that was not the case that tax evasion petition and investigation reports of subsequent vintage (after completion of assessment), of Mr. RG therefore, constituted tangible material justifying reassessment in view of foregoing discussion and conclusions.Held: The Supreme Court observed : (i) that assessment order was passed by AO, pursuant to court's order dated 4-12-2018 Sonia Gandhi v. Asstt. CIT & Ors. [Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 28627/2018, dt. 4-12-2018] : 2018 TaxPub(DT) 7737 (SC), (ii) that since CBDT Circulars No. 2/2019, dated 4-1-2019 and No. 10/2018, dated 31-12-2018 referred to by Mr. P Chidmbaram, Sr. Advocate, are not part of record, he was granted one week's time to file affidavit along with documents (iii) that the Registry was directed to list the matter on 29-1-2019. (iv) that the interim order passed on 4-12-2018 to continue in the meantime.

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