Itxa/841/2013 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax 6 v. Hindalco Industries Ltd

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO. 2037 OF 2012 The Commissioner of Income Tax-6..Appellant.V/s.Hindalco Industries Ltd...Respondent. Mr. Suresh Kumar, for the Appellant.Mr. Pankaj Toprani, for the Respondent. P.C:- CORAM: J.P.DEVADHAR & M.S.SANKLECHA,JJ.DATE : 21[st] FEBRUARY, 2013. In this Appeal for the Assessment Year 1998-99 following questions have been raised for our consideration:- (1)Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Tribunal was justified in quashing the reassessment proceedings without appreciating the fact that Explanation 1 to Section 147 of the Income Tax Act applied to the facts of the case. The explanation states that mere production before the Assessing Officer of account books or other evidence from which evidence could with due diligence have been disclosed by the Assessing Officer will not necessarily amount to disclosure? (2)Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in quashing the reassessment proceedings merely relying on the submissions made on behalf of the assessee that there was no failure on part of the assessee to disclose truly and fully all material facts necessary for assessment without discussing the nature of the documents produced and failed to analyze whether details lying deeply embedded in the massive documents furnished during assessment proceedings could be discovered prima facie by the Revenue? 2The Tribunal by the impugned order has held that the reopening of the Assessment Year 1998-99 by notice dated 24[th] March, 2005 under Section 148 of the Income Act, 1961 (the said Act) was without jurisdiction. This finding was reached by the Tribunal inasmuch as the reopening of the Assessment was done beyond four years from the end of relevant Assessment Year i. e. 1998-99 and the original order has been passed under Section 143(3) of the said Act. Further in the reasons recorded for reopening of assessment, it has not been recorded that there is any failure to disclose truly and fully all material facts necessary for assessment. In fact, the Tribunal records the fact that the original assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act had considered all the material on which the assessment is sought to b e reopened. 3In these circumstances, as the decision of the Tribunal is based on concurrent finding of fact, we see no reason to entertain the proposed questions of law. 4Accordingly, appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs. (M.S.SANKLECHA,J.) (J.P.DEVADHAR,J.)