M/s. Toyota Motor Corporation v. Commnr. Of Income TAX (2008) — Supreme Court judgment

Headnote

The reporters’ summary of the points decided. It is not part of the judgment.

[2008] 12 S.C.R. 943 MIS. TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION v. COMMNR. OF INCOME TAX (Civil Appeal No. 5313 of 2008) AUGUST 25, 2008 ~

. Income Tax Act, 1961 - s. 263 - Proceedings under Disposed of by Assessing Officer dropping the penalty proceedings - Tribunal holding that initiation of the proceedings were impermissible in the background of the materials placed by the assessee - High Court remanding the matter to Assessing Officer to pass a reasoned order - On appeal, held: Appeal does not warrant interference at this stage - Assessing Officer is required to take into account all the relevant aspects and materials and pass reasoned order. -;.

Judgment

CIVILAPPELLATEJURISDICTION: CivilAppeal No. 5313 of 2008 From the final Judgment and Order dated 2.04.2008 of the High of Delhi at New Delhi in ITA No. 166 of 2007 Soli J. Sorabjee, Sanjay Kochar, Sampath, S. Anant, Krishan Mahajan, Lakshmi Iyengar and Sandhya Goswami for the Appellant.

)

[DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT AND DR. MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA, JJ.]

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by

Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Delay condoned.

Leave granted. We are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order of the High Court. The High Court has held that th~ Assessing

Ii-

Officer had disposed the proceedings stating the penalty proceedings initiated in this case u/s 271 C read with Section 274 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are hereby dropped. According to the High Court, there was no basis indicated for dropping the proceedings. The Tribunal referred to certain aspects and B held that the initiation of proceedings under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the l.T.Act) was impermissible when considered in the background of the materials purportedly placed by the assessee before the Assessing Officer. What the High Court has done is to require the Assessing Officer to pass c a reasoned order. The High Court was of the view that Tribunal could not have substituted its own reasonings which were required to be recorded by the Assessing Officer. According to the assessee all relevant aspects were placed for consideration and if the officer did not record reasons, assessee can not be faulted.

,.___

,_ r ~ ~--

We do not think it necessary to interfere at this stage. It goes without saying that when the matter be taken up by the Assessing Officer on remand, it shall be his duty to take into account all the relevant aspects including the materials, if any, already placed by the assessee, and pass a reasoned order. The appeal is dismissed with the aforesaid obseivations.

K.K.T.

Appeal dismissed.

Text of the official Supreme Court Reports (S.C.R.) edition, extracted from the court’s PDF. Page headers and margin letters have been removed; a stray one may remain inside a paragraph. For citing, rely on the official PDF.