Karnataka High Court
M/S Travellers Choice vs The Income Tax Officer on 30 November, 2009
Bench: K.L.Manjunath, Aravind Kumar
1 Ifi raw fiIGH couam 99 KARflAEAKA Ax aAxA;¢§gff V. DAEED THIS TEE saflingx 0? NGVEMBER,-é§o9, " ymxsnnw _m~_¢ _ _ _V was HOH'BLE MR.JUSTICE K;L.aAg§uwgm3< V*« ARE , ._ ._ .z .;u THE H$§'BLE MR.J9s$xcE,ARAv:gn KuMAa WM ; I.T.A.NG.25 o§*2ée4 BETfiEEfl: A 1.
M/S RAvELL£Rs cHQ;¢EV L' , x @ asp. BY H:s;§3nmgER'mgs5s&gA-Gama nc.11x, 3g1agnE.RQxp; ,'=*~~ BAHGAfi$R$K§S§fifiO1 ' H = ";vH*. >4" .;..» APPELLAET {By sri:'g,SHAHK&K}afiv{"{ fiiifi ' Vi'.§§$ igcémg TAX OFFICER '"7if{§yns:i}»fi.v.aRAvz§a, A3V. ) , .fiERDx1{i$§;.
= uN;T?fa:$»a§§ExE, "x:3s:o§igsAn, Bfifiééafikg.
V RESPGEBEET ~_='* ¥j@h$g I.T.A filea u/s. zsaa cf the Incame ';V¥ax }Act, 1961 arising nut of ordar dated "§»$x2GG3 pa3$ed in IEA Ea, 566 ta 515XBangf199? for the assessment year 1991«§z « "praying that this Kenfbla Caurt may be pleased '*ta:
5?' mi) 2* Whether an the facts and ai:°c%.1It;*s*1:';aa*i€:£~=;~S.%A 56:-JSA V. tha case, is the wribunal z:ight"'-:§,nviVA§;.aé»: in conaluding that the as»,-3_e'ssme:4;§ii"'----.:£;s '"=v*aV3.:§,:.vd""
when no: independent recs5rdi':'2;3"_ '<':.>_f Ti'-3,_-u3.'.$C¥2_'l"'fOf the Assesszrant Year 'i--_§9}f,"--«9T2 13%-~.. ":'i1_('_Ci permissible in law ttzs "-recazfai'",r.'ea'5s€$rtes'--. togather for mare t;;"1_alrr._V one'v.§.s:a;es*:$mer:t..V_&'-aw~;a..r? 2 ' .3. Whether: the Tribt1na1'__L:V£:r§'s*.,_ju$f.i«fi§,e~c;1 §in law in halciing ffihat jé rezasans 'A Vreccyrded constitute adeqaate :r:;c$m§;»3,'i~z«=;n<:e cf the mandatory require.'fien=£:s_.~A._ '<. :£oi_:: asguming' jurisdictiesn ':.3:*.::.ie:t.§f 35;:-;:ti¢n¢V "T548 while in fact the ".r_,e';;=:so::1 .;*e:r+.iorééc1"'-§:1_of'n¢t justify in even si::g§;ga;£;iLi::;.r°:§«t1-23.': _'t.h;z;%: ixiébzne has escaped 4, W}:.{etherA"7<.:n_ i:Efze«,_fa,cts; and circumstances at' the $336: i:I¢:€:..,.'3E3:*ibuna1 right in law in c<::n<:*3u.z'£3;i.z":g?V.. assessznent is valid when tzhavvmmtigg 'issued under secticn 148 of t~11'@'_A§§£3t"5§_f$C§é3 mat mention the status cxf the "'.€:f:..3::tvwhich a return has to be A "'fiZ;ss§d?"
qzzestian that arises far: my canéiéezaximn :12'; this apmai. is whether the V' :¢¢'[3;£s;a::ing?$ recmcdaé by the Asgegsaizzg Gffiaar fig} ismze Noizicza under section 148 cf the m'.1€1'2c:r:.-zxfi Ant, canstitute adequate mnylianae of the mazmatory reqizixrmtxertzts arf 'aha Act unéez:
gaaaié? af the Ezmmm fax Amt. <"'>/4 4 », i.' The oxiginal file is praduced b;y7.._tIt:_;e learnad counsel appearing for the _;t'?e:s2.#ie}:z::1é.é;.,.
The reasvnings agsigned. by t§'lz$.'.5""'..:£"7:§..':.:":.fi"~;$;E'Eé$;7£..A§'1g ":"
Officer for the assassnrsent 93-§é is recorded Viz}. oz*ri:e '::i_; V d.t,2'?.é.9&; which reads z u: reasons t he income czhargeabla _ '2.'§<:ss 1 t.ag§i"v--'.:'V_~f¢§.r the assessxmnt D3é"'~?Ea..'Ef H V' s:.s:_'i«;§-94 has asc;.é§é%:§' wififiin 'the Izaearzirzg 05 $a¢ti¢a ié? 1¢£ :.T. Act.
E 333% _ 11%;':-ipi (fie 5 sectian 1 4 8 . '"
'V. L'?Eheréf<:}@;a, éiwhat is ta: be aarzfiidered. by us'«..i n_vth;i._sf*~--Aweal is whether the zceasczxings the er-flex sheet d:t:..2'?.é.§4 V. aon§tit§§e° the adfiqaate comliance 9f the '«v§1*$-arissiéns ¢£ gecticsm 14'? 0f the Act. Thaough the rmtzice in question is issued under sectien 148 fax: the assessment " gear azmggf azugs anéT 93-94, in the arder 6/ gheet there is no mention about we assesgszmergt yaax: 91-92. fherefare, on the facze c£;'_"'i'%:.§;_' can $3.3; there is :19 oztraer eff c¢::g>l3?.é;nc'e:V: :€:'f¢2:j the assessment year 9§.~--92:;A_v AA sheet zines mat disclasasé: -.___aba:.Vii:_ 'aha :a';$§>.=§$.;.=«:za§:r:.*if. year §1m92.
*7 . so far as fiiie a;€§3 iés-safiézzét year §2-«$3 and 93»-94 :as..1cence:~.r:§ejd§A'._ jfihé."".1é*§i:f;~£ied ccmnsel fax time e:§¥zft€e:.?i"'=?VVV--i.5}1at in View af tha Ju®m§;t' gg in ma E»¥o..§.$2[%2 and ethexf aézméetéa gipyééals, dt.9"* April 2688, .--__a. :§3>."4;.5:tn.f:3},'a:e:§_ Qriéiear: ____ was passed. by the fisssessing ii':-§f £';Lce~::j"« 3 Bivisian Bench 9:' ézhis Caurt h§a1s"'§fie3;§é'.V--i?;§1é?.;:fi such reasons films net mngtifium C¢{:xa*§}.:a§.%.;"3iaé as required. mafia}: sec? 1%? fif the A fj.%'t~.§:€;:L"««..;a3'1§; in fag: 'him fiivisian Bench ralying ugsam the varsiazzs Judgment af othar Ceurts irialuciing the Suprama Cmsrt: in :{/§. GmsIGA € Sc SGHS §.L'E'D., "$8. IIECQBE Eiafii QFFECE Se $'E"1§RS §§.§$§}3;3G {ER 1 {SC} has negativeé the (ax <3"
acsntention «sf the revanue and held oxfiesr czanrmt canstitute , Vin:}. 3z f5t;;é§n<;.A_j."~ thé _ V b aozzyliarxce as required unfiier '$ec._.1ié'?._ Rat .
8., In View aj_f p:as+se¢_ §.n PEA $39,192,102 and ether c¢i?né%¢:tézif,'fmatters between the COMlv$XSSIG':<'EER o3;=*"".i»r:<}:fr3:~1'3;j1f.5;a;.*%:'. ' z;>::.1~:.$'I-IIWA 32-my :.';i".':._£¥*'€'5'.?" gags §:&;a of the View that the have to be mat there is rm conpziangegf the 539.14? of the
-. a5s$e.%éfié§:t years. Accordingly , we of law fxaxmd.
the Apgeal is allowed' sal-
JUDGE sal-
JUDGE