Summary
The Supreme Court remanded the Revenue’s income-tax appeal because four substantial questions of law required determination. They concerned the validity of reassessment following processing under Section 143(1), the objection of change of opinion, the sufficiency of recorded reasons and, conditionally, the merits of the reassessed items. The High Court had incorrectly dismissed the appeal in limine. The Supreme Court expressly left all substantive tax issues undecided.
Issues
- Whether the Revenue’s appeal raised substantial questions of law.
- Which reassessment and merits questions required consideration on remand.
Held
- The appeal raised substantial questions concerning whether a Section 148 notice could be rejected as a change of opinion where the earlier assessment was under Section 143(1), rather than Section 143(3), and whether there had been a foundation for an earlier opinion. (¶ 10–11)
- The High Court also had to consider the recorded reasons and particulars of escaped income and, if the notice proved valid, the sustainability of the Tribunal’s findings on each reassessed item. (¶ 11–12)
- These were questions for adjudication on remand, not substantive findings validating the notice. The High Court was to decide independently, uninfluenced by the Supreme Court’s observations. (¶ 14–15)
Result
Appeal allowed. High Court dismissal set aside; Revenue’s appeal remanded for determination of the four framed substantial questions on merits, with no opinion expressed on the substantive controversy.