TRUSTEES OF H.E.H. THE NIZAM'S SUPPLEMENTAL FAMILY TRUST vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

CIVIL APPEAL No. 5395/1999Supreme Court[2000] 1 S.C.R. 86316 February 2000Bench: 2 JudgesAuthor: D.P. WADHWA, S.S.M. QUADRI OF H.E.H. THE13 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What were the facts?

The Trustees of H.E.H. The Nizam's Supplemental Family Trust (the assessee) filed an income tax return for Assessment Year 1962-63 in 1964, along with an application for refund of tax deducted at source. The Income Tax Officer (ITO) made a note on the file on November 10, 1965, stating that the credit for tax deducted at source could be considered later, but this note was not communicated to the assessee. Subsequently, the assessee received a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for reassessment for AY 1962-63, and filed a fresh return. The assessee contended that reassessment proceedings were invalid as the original return and refund application were pending. The ITO argued the note of November 10, 1965, constituted disposal of the original return. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal initially found the reassessment invalid, but the High Court, on reference, held the note to be an order of disposal and the reassessment valid. The assessee appealed to the Supreme Court.

What did the Supreme Court hold?

The Supreme Court held that reassessment proceedings under Section 147/148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, cannot be initiated if assessment proceedings based on a return already filed are pending. The Court found that the note recorded by the ITO on November 10, 1965, was merely an internal endorsement on the file and not a final order disposing of the refund application. It was an inconclusive note, leaving the matter for future consideration, and its non-communication to the assessee meant no finality was given to the refund claim. The Court emphasized that filing a return in the prescribed form along with an application for refund under Section 237 is not an empty formality and constitutes an assessment, even if the scope of examination is limited to the refund claim. Therefore, the notice for reassessment was invalid. The appeal was allowed, and the reassessment order was set aside.

What were the issues?

1. Whether reassessment proceedings under Section 147/148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, can be initiated when assessment proceedings based on a previously filed return are pending? (Question of law) 2. Whether a note recorded by the Income Tax Officer on a file, which is not communicated to the assessee, constitutes a final order disposing of the return and refund application, thereby permitting reassessment proceedings? (Question of mixed law and fact) Assessee's Contentions: The assessee argued that reassessment proceedings under Section 147/148 are invalid if assessment proceedings based on a return already filed are pending. They contended that the note of November 10, 1965, was merely an internal endorsement, not a final order, and its non-communication rendered it ineffective. Filing a return with a refund application under Section 237 is not an empty formality and requires examination, constituting an assessment. Revenue's Contentions: The revenue contended that the note recorded by the ITO on November 10, 1965, was an order of disposal of the return filed in 1964, thus allowing for reassessment proceedings. They relied on the High Court's view that this note barred the original proceedings.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 148,Section 139,Section 237,Section 246(1)(k),Section 249,Section 192,Section 194,Section 194A,Section 195,Section 203

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

TRUSTEES OF H.E.H. THE NIZA.\1'S SUPPLEMENTAL FAMILY TRUST v. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX FEBRUARY 16, 2000 (D.P. WADHWA A.11.ID SYED SHAH MOHA.\.IMED QUADRI, JJ.)

Income Tax Act, 1961 : A B Sections 143(3), 147 and 148--Reassessment-Valid return for AY C 1962-63 filed in 1964 was pending along with an application for refund of tax deducted at source-Note recorded by ITO in the file that question of giving credit for tax deducted at source could be considered at a later stage-Order not communicated to assessee-Notice to file fresh return for AY 1962- 63-fi'resh return filed -Order of reassessment challenged-Appellate Assis- tant Commissioner held reassessment valid as no final orders had been D passed on previous retum--{/pheld by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and question of law ref e"cd to High Court-High Court held the note to be an order of disposal and also held the reasseJJment valid-On appeal Held, no reassessment proceedings can be initiated if asseJ'Sment proceeding pending on basis of return already filed-Note WOJ merely an internal endorsement on E the file, no finality to the claim of refund was given-Notice for reassessment was invalid-Sections 139,

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 147

All 48,773 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →