| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1974 SLG 477 1974 SLD 477 (1974) 95 ITR 639 |
Gujarat High Court
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION Nos. 517 OF 1971 AND 218 OF 1972 DECEMBER 14, 1973
B.J. DIVAN, C.J. AND T.U. MEHTA, J.
J.M. Thakore and G. N. Shah for the Petitioner. K.H. Kaji and R.P. Bhatt for the
Respondent.
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION Nos. 517 OF 1971 AND 218 OF 1972 DECEMBER 14, 1973
B.J. DIVAN, C.J. AND T.U. MEHTA, J.
J.M. Thakore and G. N. Shah for the Petitioner. K.H. Kaji and R.P. Bhatt for the
Respondent.
Ahmedabad Cotton Mfg. Co. Ltd.
v.
Union of India
Law:
Section:
Section 147(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Reassessment Non Disclosure of Primary facts - Assessment years 1962-63 to 1965-66 - Assessee had been granted excess depreciation and certain capital gains arising on transfer of assets escaped assessment - Notices for reopening of assessment were issued - Whether merely because income-tax Authorities had changed their practice or started applying provisions of section 41(2) in full force, it could not be said that part of sale proceeds which was deemed in case as profit under section 41(2) escaped assessment by omission or failure on part of assessee - Held, yes - Whether because of combined operation of omission or failure on part of assessee to disclose material facts and declaration of duty on part of ITO, depreciation allowance was allowed in excess, it could not be said that income had escaped assessment by reason of failure or omission on part of assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessments and thus ITO had no jurisdiction to exercise jurisdiction under section 147(a) - Held, yes FACTS The ITO intended to initiate proceedings under section 147(a ) on the ground that the petitioners had been granted excessive depreciation allowance in assessment years 1960-61 to 1965-66 and certain capital gains arising on transfer of assets had not been assessed in the assessment years 1962-63 to 1964-65. Accordingly notices for reopening the assessments were issued. On Special Civil Application. It was the case of the petitioner that after verifying the records, the assessments of the petitioners had been completed and in the course of those assessment, the petitioners were granted necessary depreciation allowance while the liability on account of balancing charge on sales of assets was also brought to charge in the respective assessment year. HELD As regards the question under section 41(2), it was obvious that it was because the old practice which was being followed by the income-tax department for several years in connection with the computation of the profit under section 41(2) was discontinued that the second respondent proposed to reopen the assessment regarding the profits under…
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