Case Law Details

Case Name : Bombay Stock Exchange Ltd. Vs DCIT (Bombay High Court)
Appeal Number : Writ Petition No. 2468 of 2011
Date of Judgement/Order : 12/06/2014
Related Assessment Year :
Courts : All High Courts (3996) Bombay High Court (720)

Bald statement that assessee has failed to make a full & true disclosure of material facts not sufficient. Details must be given as to which fact was not disclosed

It is true that the reasons for initiating re-assessment proceedings do  in fact state that there was a failure on the part of the Petitioner to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for its assessment. However, as correctly submitted by Mr Dastoor, merely making this bald assertion was not enough. In this regard, the reliance placed by Mr. Dastoor on a Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Hindustan Lever Ltd. v/s R.B. Wadkar, Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and others, reported in [2004] 268 ITR 332 is well founded.

In the present case, admittedly there are no details given by the Assessing Officer (Respondent No.1) as to which fact or material was not disclosed by the Petitioner that led to it’s income escaping assessment. There is merely a bald assertion in the reasons that there was a failure on the part of the Petitioner to disclose fully and truly all material facts without giving any details thereof. This being the case, the impugned notice is bad in law and on this ground alone the Petitioner is entitled to succeed in this writ petition.

Download Judgment/Order

More Under Income Tax

Posted Under

Category : Income Tax (26782)
Type : Judiciary (10935)
Tags : high court judgments (4305) section 147 (410) section 148 (335)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *