1 ) (2007) 110 TTJ 118 (Jp)
Silver Mines
v. ITO
ITA No. 426 (Jp) 2005
A.Y. 2000-01. Dated : 21-5-2007
S. 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 – When proceedings u/s.147
are initiated, Assessing Officer cannot probe if any other income had escaped
assessment.
In the course of reassessment proceedings, the Assessing
Officer made various additions to the assessee’s income. The CIT(A) held that
when proceedings u/s.147 of the Act are initiated, the proceedings are open only
qua items of underassessment. Further, finality of assessment proceedings on
other issues remains undisturbed. He noted that no assessment was framed
u/s.143(3), nor notice u/s. 143(2) was issued within the time allowed and,
therefore, other issues which are not covered by escaped income cannot be
disturbed. Accordingly, he deleted such additions. He relied on the decisions in
the cases of Vipin Khanna v. CIT, (2002) 175 CTR (P & H) 335 and CIT
v. Sun Engineering Works (P.) Ltd., (1992) 107 CTR (SC) 209.
The Tribunal, also relying on the decisions in the above
cases, upheld the CIT(A)’s order. The Tribunal noted as under :
(a) No notice u/s.143(2) had been served on the assessee
within the stipulated time, indicating that the Assessing Officer had not
found it necessary to require the assessee to produce any evidence in support
of the return. Therefore, the return filed by the assessee had become final.
(b) Therefore, when proceedings u/s.147 are initiated, the
proceedings are open only qua items of underassessment and the finality of
assessment proceedings on other issues remains undisturbed. The amendments
made in S. 143 and S. 147 w.e.f. 1st April 1989 do not in any manner negate
this proposition of law.
(c) The Assessing Officer is not permitted to make fishing
inquiries to probe if any other income had escaped assessment or not, and such
inquiries can only be permitted if, in the first instance, some material comes
to his notice to suggest that some other item of income may have escaped
assessment or had been underassessed.