Case Law Details
Aayojan Developers Vs ITO (Gujarat High Court at Ahemdabad)
Merely because of the fact that the assessee had asserted that it is a developer in the returns filed by him, it cannot be said that there is any failure on the part of the petitioner to disclose fully and truly all material facts. At best, the petitioner has made a claim along with supporting documents, namely, development agreements for construction of housing projects, etc. and based upon the said documents, the Assessing Officer had formed an opinion and granted deduction under section 80-IB(10) of the Act. As to whether in a given set of facts, the assessee is a developer or a works contractor is a matter of inference. Hence, the assertion that the petitioner is a developer, without anything more cannot be said to be an incorrect disclosure of facts, as is sought to be contended on behalf of the revenue. In the circumstances, in the absence of any failure on the part of the petitioner to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for its assessment for the assessment year under consideration, the assumption of jurisdiction under section 147 of the Act after the expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year is illegal and invalid. The proceedings under section 147 of the Act which have been initiated by issuance of the impugned notice under section 148 of the Act, therefore, cannot be sustained.
Aayojan Developers – vs Income Tax Officer (ITO) – on 22 February, 2011
SCA/15992/2010 39/39 JUDGMENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Is it Gujarat High Court (at Ahmedabad), or Ahmedabad High Court? May kindly be clarified.