Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax Range-1, Patna v. Lord Budha Educational & Social & Development Sansthan Alam Ganj, Patna City, Patna

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNAMiscellaneous Appeal No.81 of 2010 ====================================================== Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax Range-1, Patna .... .... Appellant/s Versus Lord Budha Educational & Social & Development Sansthan Alam Ganj, Patna City, Patna .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr Harshwardhan Prasad, Advocate Mrs. Archana Sinha, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Manish Rastogi, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVA KIRTI SINGH and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVA KIRTI SINGH) 2 12-04-2012 Heard the parties. 2. The issue decided by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Patna Bench by the order under appeal dated 31.8.2009 in ITA No.219 (Pat.)/ 2008 that the Assessing Officer had no material or information to justify the initiation of reassessment proceeding with the help of Sections 147 and 148 of the Income Tax Act, has been challenged by the Revenue by preferring this appeal. 3. The learned Tribunal has noticed the contents of notice and examined the wordings used by the Assessing Officer whereby he has recorded reasons for coming to the conclusion that the taxable income has escaped assessment. Those wordings available in second paragraph of page 1 of the assessment order have been extracted in paragraph 6.1 of the order of the Tribunal 2 under appeal. The Tribunal has found that the reasons recorded by the AO has neither referred to any information or material which can lead him to have reasons to believe nor he has mentioned as to what income had escaped assessment. The Tribunal has found that the AO simply pointed out to three claims of expenditure made by the assessee in its accounts furnished along with return and thereafter without considering the complete details adopted those claims of expenditure as the reasons for forming his belief. 4. According to learned counsel for the appellant, once the AO noticed the claims of expenditure which appeared doubtful, on that basis he could form a belief for the purpose of Section 148 read with Section 147 of the Income Tax Act. On the other hand, learned counsel for the assessee has supported the views of the Tribunal with a Division Bench judgment o this Court in the case of Ranchi Handloom Emporium V. Commissioner of Income Tax, reported in 235 ITR 604. In that case this Court held that after having completed the assessment and accepted the return, as originally filed or with alterations, it is not open to him to take recourse to the provisions of Section 147 and 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for making investigation and indulging in a roving and fishing enquiry. This Court further held that while it is open to the AO to collect evidence or new materials which may form the basis for reasons to believe escapement of taxable income, he cannot come to such an opinion only on the basis of suspicion or doubt. The Court categorically held : “It is only after he comes to form a reasonable belief, distinct from suspicion or doubt, on the basis of some fresh material or evidence that he can issue notice under Section 148 and start reassessment proceedings”. 3 / 3 5. Since the views taken by the Tribunal are in accordance with law already laid down by the Courts including this Court, in our view, no substantial question of law arises in this appeal. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed. (Shiva Kirti Singh, J) (Vikash Jain, J) sk