| |
| The Tax Publishers2020 TaxPub(DT) 2258 (Mad-HC) : (2020) 429 ITR 0107 : (2020) 316 CTR 0196 CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, 1950
Article 226
Mere filing of annexure in response to notice during scrutiny assessment might or might not have been sufficient to come to the conclusion that there was full and true disclosure by assessee if the information furnished was neither complete nor true. Under these circumstances, there was no merit in quashing the section 148 notice issued beyond four years and, therefore, assessee was relegated to participate in proceedings before AO by filing appropriate representations/objections.
|
Writ - Maintainability - Assessee sought quashing of section 148 notice by way of writ petition pleading change of opinion on AO's part -
AO issued section 148 notice after expiry of four years from the end of relvant assessment year so as to reopen assessment. Assessee challenged this by way of writ petition filed before High court pleading that assessee by way of filing of annexure in response to notice during scrutiny assessment made full and true disclosure of all material facts and reopening was sought to be done out of mere change of opinion by AO. Held: Mere filing of annexure in response to notice during scrutiny assessment might or might not have been sufficient to come to the conclusion that there was full and true disclosure by assessee if the information furnished was neither complete nor true. Whether information furnished was complete in all respect was to be decided only in a adjudicator mechanism. It was therefore, best left open for assessee to demonstrate before AO that details furnished by assessee met the requirements of full and true disclosure for AO to drop the proceedings in terms of 1st provisio to section 147. In case indeed there was a mere change in opinion, AO would be obliged to drop the proceeding. However, to ascertain whether there was a mere change of opinion or not first it had to be established that there was true and full disclosure by assessee. This could be demonstrated by assessee only before AO and not in a proceeding under article 226 of Constitution of India as scope of judicial review was very limited and it was not possible to conduct a roving enquiry on facts and accounts. Under these circumstances, there was no merit in quashing the impugned Notice, and assessee was therefore, relegated to participate in proceedings before AO by filing appropriate representations/objections within a period of thirty days and AO was obliged to pass orders on merits in accordance with law writ dismissed.
REFERRED :
FAVOUR : Writ dismissed.
A.Y. : 2003-04
 SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT
|