Case Details

Citation(s)
2012 SLG 3211 2012 SLD 3211 (2012) 344 ITR 43
Madras High Court
TAX CASE (APPEAL) NO. 550 OF 2004 JULY 6, 2011
MRS. CHITRA VENKATARAMAN AND M. JAICHANDREN, JJ.
T. Ravikumar for the Appellant. R. Vijayaraghavan for the
Respondent.

Commissioner of IncomE tax v. Simpson and Co.

Law:

Section:

Section 17 of the Wealth-Tax Act, 1957 - Reassessment - Assessment year 1985-86 - Mere fact that Assessing Officer rejected valuation of assessee, based on valuer's report obtained under section 16A in respect of a reference made during pendency of assessment, by itself, would not justify requirements under section 17(1)(a) to reopen assessment under section 17(1)(a) [In favour of assessee] In respect of relevant assessment year, the assessment was originally completed under section 16(3). Admittedly even before the completion of the assessment, the WTO had made a reference to the Valuation Officer under section 16A. However, in view of the limitation on the assessment, the same was completed as early as on 13-3-1990. However, on the basis of the Valuation Officer's report received subsequent to the assessment, the assessment was reopened under section 17 after end of four years from relevant assessment year and assessment was made on basis of valuation report. On appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) held that valuation report was only an opinion and, hence, could not constitute the reason to believe the escapement of wealth-tax for reassessment under section 17. The Tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeal. Held that the assessee had returned its income and the materials were also placed before the WTO at the time of the original assessment; thereby there was nothing to suggest that the assessee had withheld the material facts or that the facts placed before the officer were not truly and fully disclosed, necessary for assessment. Hence, there was no ground to accept the case of the revenue that the officer had exercised his jurisdiction under section 17(1)(a) to reopen the assessment. The second proviso to section 17(1), which was introduced with effect from 1-4-1989, was not available during the relevant assessment year. To justify reopening under section 17(1)(a) there must be a nexus between the material at the hands of the officer and formation of belief that there was escapement of wealth from assessment on account of the failure of the assessee to disclose fully and truly, all material facts. In the absence of any nexus or anyone of the requirements, the…
🔒
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