The formation of belief u/s 148 by the AO is within realm of subjective satisfaction скачать в хорошем качестве

The formation of belief u/s 148 by the AO is within realm of subjective satisfaction

link for full case:https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QGy3... Case Summary: [2021] 437 ITR 144 (Guj) [IN THE GUJARAT HIGH COURT] BACKBONE PROJECTS LIMITED v.ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX August 6, 2021. Section 148, Writ The formation of belief u/s 148 by the AO is within realm of subjective satisfaction Section(s): Income-tax Act, 1961, ss. 132, 133(6), 147, 148 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Sumati Dayal v. CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801 SC Section 148 is valid in the following circumstances 1. When material is brought to the notice of A.O., which would prima facie discredit or impeach the genuineness of the particulars furnished by the assessee at the original assessment. 2. When there is a link between the assessee and the third party who is a accommodation entry provider. 3. Then in the above cases the A.O. is empowered, rather duty bound, to make further inquiry and investigation to unearth such camouflage or wrong or illegal dealings of the assessee. 4. The apparent must be considered as real until it is shown that there are reasons to belief that the apparent is not the real. 5. The taxing officers are entitled to look into surrounding circumstances to find out the reality and the matter has to be considered by applying the test of human probabilities. 6. CIT (Asst) v. Rajesh Jhaveri stock Brokers Pvt Ltd. 2007, 291 ITR 500 (SC) ITO v. Selected Dalurband Coal Co. Pvt. Ltd. [1996] 217 ITR 597 (SC) Raymend Woolen Mills Ltd. v. ITO (1999) 236 ITR 34 (SC) 7. The expression “Reason to believe” cannot be read to mean that the AO. Should have finally ascertained the fact by legal evidence or conclusion. 8. The term reason to believe would cause or justification. 9. The formation of belief by the AO is within the realm of subjective satisfaction. 10. If the AO Has cause or justification to know or suppose that income has escaped assessment, it can be said that he has escaped assessment. Facts of the case: AO issued notice u/s 133(6) to verify the information received from investigation, that the assessee has taken accommodation entries. The notice was not responded to. Then AO issued notice u/s 148, on the ground that he had reason to believe that income chargeable to tax for the AY 12-13 had escaped assessment. Writ petition filed by the assessee dismissed Reason: 1. Fresh material brought on record 2. 133 (6) not complied by assessee. 3. Mere production of the books of accounts or documents with the return of income was not full and true disclosure of all material facts. Cases referred to : Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd. v. ITO [1961] 41 ITR 191 (SC) (para 5) CIT (Asst.) v. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd. [2007] 291 ITR 500 (SC) (para 10) Ess Ess Kay Engineering Co. (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [2001] 247 ITR 818 (SC) (para 14) Hynoup Food and Oil Industries Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [2008] 307 ITR 115 (Guj) (para 5) ITO v. Selected Dalurband Coal Co. Pvt. Ltd. [1996] 217 ITR 597 (SC) (para 10) Manan Exports (P.) Ltd. v. ITO [2017] 78 taxmann.com 225 (Guj) (para 5) New Delhi Television Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2020] 424 ITR 607 (SC) (para 5) Phool Chand Bajrang Lal v. ITO [1993] 203 ITR 456 (SC) (para 13) Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. v. ITO [1999] 236 ITR 34 (SC) (para 10) Sumati Dayal v. CIT [1995] 214 ITR 801 (SC) (para 7) #BACKBONEPROJECTSLIMITEDvASSISTANTCOMMISSIONEROFINCOMETAX #Section148 #writ #CalcuttaDiscountCoLtdvITO #CITAsstvRajeshJhaveriStockBrokersPvtLtd #EssEssKayEngineeringCoPLtdvCIT #HynoupFoodandOilIndustriesLtdvAsstCIT #ITOvSelectedDalurbandCoalCoPvtLtd #MananExportsPLtdvITO #NewDelhiTelevisionLtdvDyCIT #PhoolChandBajrangLalvITO #RaymondWoollenMillsLtdvITO #SumatiDayalvCIT #IncomeTaxcasesUpdates #LatestIncomeTaxcases #IncomeTax #IncomeTax1961 #IncomeTaxNotices #IncomeTaxCases #incometaxcasesanalysis #IncomeTaxLaw #advocateamitkumargupta #9811291390 #amitkrg246@gmail.com #amitkrg246@yahoo.com #amitkumargupta