PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 vs. INDIAN METALS AND FERRO ALLOYS SLTD.

PDF · subscribers
ITA/145/2018HC OrissaODHC01051035201807 February 2024Bench: DR. JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI,MR. JUSTICE GOURISHANKAR SATAPATHY2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court found no need to interfere with the tribunal's finding because the assessing officer did not base the reassessment on fresh material or prove any suppression of information. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed.

What were the facts?

The assessing officer initiated reassessment proceedings without relying on any new material that came to light after the initial assessment. The same material was used for both the initial assessment and the reassessment.

What were the issues?

Whether reassessment proceedings are valid when initiated without new material and without proving suppression of information.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 40(a)(ia)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

ITA No.145 of 2018

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Bhubaneswar

…. Appellant (s)

Mr. T.K. Satapathy, Sr. Standing Counsel

-versus-

Indian Metals & Ferro Alloys Ltd., Bhubaneswar

…. Respondent (s) Mr. S. Jolly, Adv.

CORAM: DR. JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI MR JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY ORDER 07.02.2024 Order No.

12.

1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement.

2.

Learned counsel for the parties are present. Judgment prepared in separate sheets is delivered and pronounced in open Court in the presence of learned counsel for the parties and the order is passed accordingly as follows:-

3.

In the present case, the assessing officer has not relied on any new material which has come to light after the initial assessment on 31.12.2011. Even as regards the issue of disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia), the Assessing Officer did not form a decision on the basis of any fresh or new material. Rather, the same material Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Designation: Assistant Registrar-cum-Senior Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 23-Apr-2024 17:11:20 Signature Not Verified

Page 2 of 2

has been relied on to initiate reassessment. Moreover, no suppression of information has been proved. In light of this, there is no need to interfere with the finding of the tribunal. Thus, the Appeal is dismissed. No order as to cost.

(Dr.S.K.Panigrahi) Judge

(G.Satapathy) Judge

B. Jhankar Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Designation: Assistant Registrar-cum-Senior Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 23-Apr-2024 17:11:20 Signature Not Verified

More judgments on Section 40(a)(ia)

All 7,300 judgments and leading authorities on Section 40(a)(ia) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →