Case Details

Citation(s)
2003 SLG 3401 2003 SLD 3401 (2003) 264 ITR 566
Supreme Court of India
CIVIL APPEAL Nos. 5269 TO 5271 OF 2001 JANUARY 16, 2003
MRS. RUMA PAL AND B.N. SRIKRISHNA, JJ.
Foramer France

Commissioner of IncomE tax

v.

Foramer France

Law:

Section:

Section 148, read with sections 147 and 153, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Income escaping assessment - Issue of notice for - Assessment years 1988-89 to 1990-91 - Petitioner-foreign company was engaged in business of oil exploration and providing expertise and assistance in said field - Proceeds from manning and management contracts received by petitioner were originally assessed in February, 1991 under section 143(3) treating same as business income in terms of section 44BB - However, following Tribunal's decision rendered in case of petitioner's expatriate employee, Assessing Officer issued a notice under section 148 in November, 1998 seeking to reassess same income as fees for technical services - Whether law prevailing on date of issue of impugned notice would apply to instant case, and since new section 147 had come into force with effect from 1-4-1989, provisions of that section were applicable - Held, yes - Whether since admittedly there was no failure on part of petitioner to make return or to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment, proviso to new section, which bars issue of notice under section 148 after expiry of four years from end of relevant assessment year, squarely applied to facts of instant case and, therefore, impugned notice was barred by limitation - Held, yes - Whether since notice under section 148 was without jurisdiction, there was no merit in plea that petitioner was to be relegated to alternative remedy - Held, yes Section 153 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Reassessment - Time-limit for completion of - Assessment years 1988-89 to 1990-91 - Whether provisions of section 153 are inapplicable to issue of notice under section 148 and refer to assessment - Held, yes - Whether a 'direction' or 'finding' as contemplated by section 153(3)(ii) must be a finding necessary for disposal of a particular case, that is to say, in respect of a particular assessee and in relevance to a particular assessment year - Held, yes - Whether to be a direction as contemplated by section 153(3)(ii), it must be an express direction necessary for disposal of case before authority or Court - Held, yes - Whether on facts stated under…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492