Validity of Notice u/s 148. It is not necessary that original assessment order should contain discussion to disclose satisfaction.
ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
ABCAUS 3657 (2023) (02) SC
Important Case Laws covered:
Aroni Commercials Ltd. vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 2014] 44 taxmann.com 304 (Bombay)
In the instant case, the Petitioners, before the Hon’ble High Court had challenge the validity of a notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) seeking to reopen the assessment.
The Petitioners challenged the jurisdiction on the ground that the impugned notice had been issued only on account of change of opinion, seeking to deny the Petitioners the benefit of deduction under Section 10A of the Act.
The Hon’ble High Court found that during the assessment proceedings leading to the order under Section 143(3) of the Act, the Assessing Officer had specifically inquired of the Petitioners how the Petitioners were eligible to deduction under Section 10A of the Act along with the working of the claim for deduction. Besides the copies of the bill were also asked for.The Petitioners had responded to the same, giving complete details and thereafter the assessment order under Section 143(3) of the Act came to be passed.
Prima facie the Hon’ble High Court found that once a query has been raised with reference to the claim under Section 10A of the Act and the Petitioners had responded to the same with complete details, as asked for, there has been an application of mind on the part of the Assessing Officer and extent of examination cannot give jurisdiction to issue the impugned notice.
The Revenue contended that in the assessment order there was no discussion on any examination with regard to deduction claimed.
The Hon’ble High Court stated that it is settled law that it is not necessary that the assessment order should contain reference and/or discussion to disclose its satisfaction in respect of the query raised. Once a query is raised during the assessment proceedings and the assessee has replied to it, it follows that a query raised was a subject of consideration of the Assessing Officer while completing the assessment.
As a result, the Hon’ble High Court quashed and set aside the notice issued under Section 148 of the Act.
The Revenue contested the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court before the Hon’ble Supreme Court by way of filing a Special Leave Petition (SLP). However, the Apex Court declined to interfere with the judgment(s) and order(s) passed by the High Court and dismissed the SLP.
Mere CBDT Instructions cannot absolve individuals of their obligation to explain the source and nature of their gold holdings, even…
Empanelment of General Observers for ICSI Examinations December 2026 ICSI has invited interested members to enroll as General Observers for…
ITAT answers some important and inter-related issues relating to deduction u/s 80IA In a recent judgment, ITAT has dealt with…
Carry forward of loss can not be denied for belated return, it is only the set off in subsequent year…
Where sales are duly recorded in books and VAT returns, to treat it bogus sales, AO must bringing cogent adverse…
Expenses to celebrate Diwali with staff creates a goodwill and, therefore amounts to expenses incurred for the purpose of business…