|The Tax Publishers2020 TaxPub(DT) 5347 (Mad-HC) : (2020) 317 CTR 0456
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, 1950
Where attempt of the petitioner was to derail the hearing before authority as there was no explanation forthcoming from the petitioner for not coming before this Court, more particularly, when during this period petitioner was issued a reminder notice and petitioner responded to the same pleading for time and had not approached Court in petition with the requisite sincerity, therefore, petition was dismissed as bereft of bona fides and lacking in merits, albeit preserve.
Writ - Reopening of assessment under section 147 - No explanation from petitioner for not coming before court -
Six different notices were issued to petitioner inter alia under section 148 on the ground that authority believes that income chargeable to tax for the respective assessment years qua notices had escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147. Petitioner sought for reasons for reopening the assessments and submitted that reasons for reopening the assessments may be provided at the earliest so as to enable the writ petitioner/assessee to file objections to the same. Sum and substance of response of the Department was that there was a survey inter alia under section 133A and i.e., survey conducted in the premises of petitioner. It was also pointed out that during such survey, bills/invoices for all the expenses claimed, loan agreement copies, etc., were called for but no details have been furnished. Reason for reopening was that petitioner was not able to provide bills/invoices for expenses to the tune of nearly 60 per cent claimed as expenses and that the details have not been furnished even though time was granted.Held: A plain reading of aforesaid clause (ca) of Explanation 2 of section 147 makes it clear that it cannot be gainsaid that section 133C survey cannot be the basis for a section 148 notice regarding escaped assessment. Therefore, it comes out clearly that this was an attempt to derail the hearing before authority as there was no explanation forthcoming from the petitioner for not coming before this Court more particularly, when during this period the writ petitioner was issued a reminder notice and petitioner responded to the same pleading for time. Petitioner had not approached Court in petition with the requisite sincerity. This Court was of the considered view that petition will derail assessments process under fiscal law statues. Thus, petition was dismissed as bereft of bona fides and lacking in merits.
Relied:GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. v. ITO & Ors. (2003) 259 ITR 19 (SC) : 2003 TaxPub(DT) 734 (SC) and Tenzing Match Works v. Dy. CIT 2020 TaxPub(DT) 126 (Mad-HC).
FAVOUR : Petition dismissed.
A.Y. : 2012-13 to 2017-18
SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT