Facts of the Case
The petitioner, Subhash Chander Dabas, filed his return of
income for Assessment Year 2012–13 on 30.09.2012. The return was scrutinised
and assessed under Section 143(3) by an assessment order dated 26.03.2015.
On 31.03.2019, the Assessing Officer issued a notice under
Section 148 seeking to reopen the completed assessment beyond four years from
the end of the relevant assessment year. The reasons recorded alleged that the
petitioner had received ₹24,80,29,000/- from the Delhi States Newspaper
Employees Cooperative Group Housing Society during FY 2011–12 and had failed to
disclose the same in his return of income, thereby attracting the proviso to
Section 147.
During the reassessment proceedings and in the counter
affidavit filed before the Court, the Revenue admitted that no amount had been
received directly by the petitioner from the society. Instead, it was asserted
that funds were routed through corporate entities in which the petitioner held
substantial shareholding. On this altered premise, the reassessment order dated
31.12.2019 treated certain amounts as deemed dividend under Section 2(22)(e).
Issues Involved
Whether reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 148
can be sustained when the foundational allegation recorded in the reasons for
reopening is subsequently admitted by the Revenue to be factually incorrect,
and whether reassessment can be justified on a new basis not forming part of
the recorded reasons.
Petitioner’s Arguments
The petitioner contended that the reassessment proceedings
were vitiated as the sole basis for reopening—alleged direct receipt of funds
from the housing society—was admitted by the Revenue to be incorrect. It was
argued that the validity of a Section 148 notice must be tested strictly on the
reasons recorded at the time of issuance and cannot be supplemented, improved,
or altered subsequently. The petitioner further submitted that, in the absence
of any direct receipt, there was no failure to disclose material facts so as to
satisfy the proviso to Section 147.
Respondent’s Arguments
The Revenue argued that although the original allegation
regarding direct receipt was incorrect, the funds had ultimately reached the
petitioner through entities in which he held substantial interest, justifying
reassessment and addition under Section 2(22)(e) as deemed dividend.
Court Order / Findings
The Delhi High Court held that the validity of reassessment
proceedings must be examined strictly on the basis of the reasons recorded at
the time of issuance of the Section 148 notice. The Court found that the only
allegation forming the foundation of the “reasons to believe” was the alleged
direct receipt of ₹24.80 crore by the petitioner from the housing society.
The Court noted that the Revenue itself admitted that no such
direct receipt had taken place. Consequently, the very edifice on which the
reassessment proceedings were initiated stood demolished. The Court held that
reassessment proceedings cannot be sustained by shifting to a new factual or
legal basis not reflected in the original reasons.
Relying on its earlier decisions including ATS
Infrastructure Ltd. and Living Media India Ltd., the Court
reiterated that reasons for reopening cannot be of “changing hues” and cannot
be supplemented or substituted after issuance of notice under Section 148.
Important Clarification
The Court clarified that where reassessment is initiated
beyond four years from the end of the relevant assessment year after completion
of assessment under Section 143(3), strict compliance with the proviso to
Section 147 is mandatory. If the foundational facts alleged to constitute
failure of full and true disclosure are found to be incorrect, reassessment
cannot be sustained.
Final Outcome
The writ petition was allowed. The Delhi High Court quashed
the notice dated 31.03.2019 issued under Section 148 and set aside the
reassessment order dated 31.12.2019 for Assessment Year 2012–13. Liberty was
reserved with the Revenue to initiate fresh proceedings, if otherwise
permissible in law. All pending applications were disposed of accordingly.
Link to download the order - https://www.mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1769841455_SUBHASHCHANDERDABASVsASSISTANTCOMMISSIONEROFINCOMETAX.pdf
Disclaimer
This content is shared strictly for general information and
knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information
from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or
advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability
arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the
assistance of AI tools.
0 Comments
Leave a Comment