COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-IV V. VADILAL DAIRY INTERNATIONAL LTD

TAXAP/1107/2011

AI Insights

The case involves the Commissioner of Income Tax-IV as the appellant and Vadilal Dairy International Ltd as the respondent. The core issue was the legality of the reassessment proceedings initiated by the revenue for the Assessment Year 1994-95, which were started after a lapse of six years from the end of the relevant assessment year. The Tribunal had quashed these proceedings, leading to the appeal by the Commissioner of Income Tax. The High Court, after reviewing the facts and the applicable law, concurred with the Tribunal's decision, emphasizing the time limitation prescribed under Section 149 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 736374 (HC-GUJARAT)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 31-08-2012
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Assessee Lawyers: PAURAMI SHETH
• Keywords: Capital receipt; Reassessment proceedings; Time barred
• Section: 147; 149; 150; 152

Judgement Text

"TAXAP/1107/2011 1/3 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD TAX APPEAL No. 1107 of 2011 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V . M. SAHAI Sd/- HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.V . ANJARIA Sd/- ========================================= 1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? NO 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not ? NO 3. Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? NO 4. Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? NO 5. Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? NO ========================================= COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-IV - Appellant Versus VADILAL DAIRY INTERNATIONAL LTD - Opponent ========================================= Appearance : MS PAURAMI B SHETH for Appellant. None for Opponent. ========================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V . M. SAHAI and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.V . ANJARIA Date : 31/08/2012 ORAL JUDGMENT TAXAP/1107/2011 2/3 JUDGMENT (Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V . M. SAHAI) We have heard Ms. Paurami Sheth, learned Central Government Standing Counsel appearing for the revenue. 2. This Tax Appeal has been filed on the following two proposed substantial questions of law :- “[I] Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in quashing the reassessment proceedings u/s. 147 r.w.s. 150 of the I.T. Act ? [II] Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in deleting the addition made of Rs.80 Lacs treating it as capital receipt and therefore holding that the provisions of section 150 of the I.T. Act are not applicable ?” 3. While dismissing the appeal, the Tribunal has recorded a categorical finding of fact that the reopening of assessment was initiated on 14.3.2007 for the Assessment Year 1994-95. The reopening has been initiated after a period of six years from the end of the relevant Assessment Year. Section 149 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act') provides that no notice under Section 148 shall be issued for the relevant Assessment Year in case falling within the section 149(1)(b) of the Act where the period of six years has been lapsed from the end of the relevant Assessment Year. Therefore, the provisions of section 152 of the Act would not apply to the case in hand. The Tribunal has further recorded a finding that no finding has been recorded in any of the appellate orders for the Assessment Year 1992-93 that such income was taxable in the Assessment Year 1994-95. The Tribunal has held that reopening of assessment after a period of six years from the end of the assessment year as per Section 149 of the Act is clearly time barred TAXAP/1107/2011 3/3 JUDGMENT and has accordingly deleted the additions. 4. We do not find any illegality in the order of the Tribunal as we are also of the opinion that the proceedings initiated by the revenue was time barred. We do not find any substantial questions of law that arises for consideration of this Court. This appeal is concluded of finding of facts and is accordingly dismissed. Sd/- [V . M. SAHAI, J.] Sd/- [N. V . ANJARIA, J.] Savariya "