IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
.
.
.
ITA 83/2012
.
.
.
CIT ..... Appellant
.
Through Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Adv.
.
.
.
versus
.
.
.
JCB INDIA LTD ..... Respondent
.
Through
.
.
.
CORAM:
.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA
.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR
.
.
.
O R D E R
.
13.02.2012
.
.
.
By the impugned order dated 30th March, 2011, the Income Tax
Appellate Tribunal (for short, the tribunal) has dismissed the appeal of
the Revenue holding that the requirement of failure/omission of the
assessee to make full and true disclosure of material facts was not
satisfied in the present case.
.
2. The assessment year in question is 2001-02 and the reasons for
reopening were recorded on 31st March, 2008 i.e. four years after the end
of the relevant assessment year. It is admitted that earlier there was a
regular assessment under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, vide
order dated 30th September, 2004, at an income of Rs.53,54,39,446/-.
.
3. In the reasons recorded, it was stated as under:-
.
?The regular assessment in this case was completed under section
143(3) on 30.09.2009 at total income of Rs.53,54,39,446/-.
.
The examination of the assessment records reveals that the assessee
has claimed a sum of Rs.26,50,830/- on account of expenditure on club,
which is in the nature of non business expenditure. Hence, the same is
disallowable.
.
I have therefore reason to believe that the income of Rs.
26,50,830/- chargeable to tax has escaped assessment within the meaning
of section 148 of the Act. The income of the assessee requires re-
computation.?
.
.
.
4. The tribunal has recorded a finding of fact that in the original
assessment proceedings, the assessee had shown and disclosed that an
amount of Rs.26,50,830/- was incurred as club expenditure. It was
claimed as a business expenses in the return. The expenditure was
separately indicated in the Tax Audit Report in table 1. The Assessing
Officer had allowed the same.
.
5. Before the tribunal, the Revenue had submitted that there was
failure/omission on the part of the respondent-assessee to make full and
true disclosure of material facts. However, the said contention could
not be substantiated. The Revenue is not able to point out how and in
what manner there was failure to disclose the said expenditure or the
nature and character was not stated or disclosed. The true and full
disclosure of the expenditure was made in the return. The stand and
content of the respondent assessee was that the expenditure was for
business purpose and allowable under Section 37 of the Act.
.
6. Learned counsel for the Revenue submitted that in course of the
reassessment proceedings, the assessee had agreed that 50% of the club
expenses should be disallowed. The said contention of the Revenue has to
be rejected as it was an alternative contention and secondly, the
judicial pre condition for reopening are not satisfied in the present
case.
.
7. In view of the aforesaid factual position, it is held that the
order passed by the tribunal is correct and does not require any
interference. The appeal is dismissed.
.
.
.
.
.
SANJIV KHANNA, J.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
R.V.EASWAR, J.
.
FEBRUARY 13, 2012
.
NA
.
.
.
.
.
$ 5
.