Gauhati High Court
Mukund Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. And Anr ... vs Union Of India And 5 Ors Represented By ... on 3 September, 2025
Page No.# 1/8
GAHC010185492025
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WA/269/2025
1: MUKUND INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD. AND ANR A PVT. LTD.
COMPANY HAVING ITS OFFICE AT ABHAY CHANDRA DUTTA LANE, F.A.
ROAD, KUMARPARA, P.O. GUWAHATI 781001, P.S. BHARALUMUKH, DIST.
KAMRUP (M), ASSAM.
2: SHRI RISHI GUPTA
ABHAY CHANDRA DUTTA LANE FA ROAD KUMARPARA
PO GUWAHATI PS BHARALUMUKH DISTRICT KAMRUP METRO ASSAM
VERSUS
1: UNION OF INDIA AND 5 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE SECY. TO THE
MINISTRY OF FINANCE, GOVT. OF INDIA, NEW DELHI
2:THE ASSISTANT/ DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 4
GUWAHATI ROOM NO. 502 5TH FLOOR AAYAKAR BHAWAN CHRISTIAN
BASTI GS ROAD PO GUWAHATI 781005 PS. DISPUR DISTRICT. KAMRUP
METRO ASSAM
3:ADDITIONAL / JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX RANGE 4
GUWAHATI AAYAKAR BHAWAN CHRISTIAN BASTI GS ROAD PO
GUWAHATI 781005 P.S. DISPUR DISTRICT. KAMRUP METRO ASSAM
4:PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER / COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
GUWAHATI 2 GUWAHATI AAYAKAR BHAWAN CHRISTIAN BASTI GS ROAD
PO GUWAHATI 781005 PS DISPUR DISTRICT KAMRUP METRO ASSAM
5:PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CCA NER
GUWAHATI OFFICE OF THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(NER) FIRST FLOOR AAYAKAR BHAWAN CHRISTIAN BASTI GS ROAD
PO GUWAHATI 781005 PS DISPUR DISTRICT KAMRUP METRO ASSAM.
6:CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES REPRESENTED BY ITS
CHAIRPERSON UNDER THE MINISTRY OF FINANCE DEPARTMENT OF
REVENUE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA NORTH BLOCK NEW DELHI 11000
Page No.# 2/8
Linked Case : WA/274/2025
1: PAWAN CEMENT CO. PVT. LTD. AND ANR. REPRESENTED BY ITS
DIRECTOR SHRI RAJESH KUMAR MITTAL SHANTI SANAD ALOK PRESS
BYE LANE ROAD NARAYAN NAGAR KUMARPARA PO GUWAHATI 781009
PS BHARALUMUKH DISTRICT KAMRUP METRO ASSAM
2: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR MITTAL
SHANTI SANAD ALOK PRESS BYE LANE ROAD NARAYAN NAGAR
KUMARPARA PO GUWAHATI 781009 PS BHARALUMUKH DISTRICT
KAMRUP METRO ASSAM
VERSUS
1: THE UNION OF INDIA AND 5 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO
THE MINISTRY OF FINANCE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA NEW DELHI
2:THE ASSISTANT / DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 4
GUWAHATIROOM NO 502 5TH FLOOR AAYKAR BHAWAN CHRISTIAN BASTI
GS ROAD PO GUWAHATI 781005 PS DISPUR DISTRICT KAMRUP METRO
ASSAM
3:ADDITIONAL / JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX RANGE 4
GUWAHATI AAYKAR BHAWAN CHRISTIAN BASTI GS ROAD PO GUWAHATI
781005 PS DISPUR DISTRICT KAMRUP METRO ASSAM
4:PRINCIPAL COMMISISONER / COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
GUWAHATI 2 GUWAHATIAAYKAR BHAWAN CHRISTIAN BASTI GS ROAD
PO GUWAHATI 781005 PS DISPUR DISTRICT KAMRUP METRO ASSAM
5:PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CCA NER GUWAHATI
OFFICE OF THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX A NER
FIRST FLOOR AAYKAR BHAWAN CHRISTIAN BASTI GS ROAD PO
GUWAHATI PS DISPUR DISTRICT KAMRUP 781005 METRO ASSAM
6:CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES REPERSENTED BY ITS
CHAIRPERSON UNDER THE MINISTRY OF FINANCE DEPARTMENT OF
REVENUE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA NORTH BLOCK NEW DELHI 110001
Linked Case : WA/272/2025
1: MUKUND SYSTEM AND NETWORKING PVT. LTD. AND ANR A PVT. LTD
COMPANY HAVING ITS OFFICE AT THIRD FLOOR ROYAL ARCHADE PART II
B BARUAH ROAD ULUBARI P.O. GUWAHATI 781007 P.S. PALTAN BAZAR
DIST. KAMRUP (M) ASSAM.
2: SHRI RISHI GUPTA (FORMERLY SHRI RISHI KUMAR GUPTA) ABHAY
CHANDRA DUTTA LANE FA ROAD KUMRPARA PO GUWAHATI 781001 PS
BHARALUMUKH DISTRICT KAMRUP METRO ASSAM
Page No.# 3/8
VERSUS
1: THE UNION OF INDIA AND 5 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE SECY. TO THE
MINISTRY OF FINANCE GOVT. OF INDIA NEW DELHI.
2:THE ASSISTANT DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 4
GUWAHATIROOM NO. 502 5TH FLOOR AAYKAR BHAWAN CHRISTIAN
BASTI GS ROAD PO GUWAHTI PS DISPUR DISTRICT KAMRUP METRO
ASSAM
3:ADDITIONAL / JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX RANGE 4
GUWAHATI AAYKAR BHAWAN CHRISTAN BASTI GS ROAD PO GUWAHATI
781005 PS DISPUR DISTRICT KAMRUP METRO ASSAM
4:PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER / COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
GUWAHATI 2 GUWAHATI AAYAKAR BHAWAN CHRISTIAN BASTI GS ROAD
PO GUWAHATI 781005 PS DISPUR DISTRICT KAMRUP METRO ASSAM
5:PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CCA NER GUWAHATI
OFFICE OF THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX NER
FIRST FLOOR AAYKAR BHAWAN CHRISTIAN BASTI GS ROAD PO
GUWAHATI 781005 PS DISPUR DISTRICT KAMRUP METRO ASSAM
6:CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES REPESENTED BY ITS CHAIRPERSON
UNDER THE MINISTRY OF FINANCE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA NORTH BLOCK NEW DELHI - 110001
Linked Case : WA/270/2025
1: PAWAN COMMUNICATION PVT. LTD. AND ANR A PVT. LTD. COMPANY
HAVING ITS OFFICE AT ABHAY CHANDRA DUTTA LANE F.A. ROAD
KUMARPARA P.O. GUWAHATI 781001 P.S. BHARALUMUKH DIST. KAMRUP
(M) ASSAM.
2: SHRI RISHI GUPTA (FORMERLY SHRI RISHI KUMAR GUPTA)
ABHAY CHANDRA DUTTA LANE FA ROAD KUMRPARA PO GUWAHATI
781001 PS BHARALUMUKH DISTRICT KAMRUP METRO ASSAM
VERSUS
1: UNION OF INDIA AND 5 ORS. REPRESENTED BY THE SECY. TO THE
MINISTRY OF FINANCE GOVT. OF INDIA NEW DELHI.
2:THE ASSISTANT DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
CIRCLE 4 GUWAHATI ROOM NO. 502 5TH FLOOR AAYKAR BHAWAN
CHRISTIAN BASTI GS ROAD PO GUWAHTI PS DISPUR DISTRICT KAMRUP
METRO ASSAM
Page No.# 4/8
3:ADDITIONAL / JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX RANGE 4
GUWAHATI AAYKAR BHAWAN CHRISTAN BASTI GS ROAD PO GUWAHATI
781005 PS DISPUR DISTRICT KAMRUP METRO ASSAM
4:PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER / COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
GUWAHATI 2 GUWAHATI AAYAKAR BHAWAN CHRISTIAN BASTI GS ROAD
PO GUWAHATI 781005 PS DISPUR DISTRICT KAMRUP METRO ASSAM
5:PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CCA NER
GUWAHATIOFFICE OF THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME
TAX NER FIRST FLOOR AAYKAR BHAWAN CHRISTIAN BASTI GS ROAD
PO GUWAHATI 781005 PS DISPUR DISTRICT KAMRUP METRO ASSAM
6:CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES REPESENTED BY ITS CHAIRPERSON
UNDER THE MINISTRY OF FINANCE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA NORTH BLOCK NEW DELHI - 110001
Linked Case : WA/277/2025
1: MUKUND INFOTEL PVT. LTD. AND ANR
ABHAY CHANDRA DUTTA LANE FA ROAD KUMARPARA PO GUWAHATI
781001 PS BHARALUMUKH DISTRICT KAMRUP METRO ASSAM
2: SHRI RISHI GUPTA
ABHAY CHANDRA DUTTA LANE FA ROAD KUMARPARA PO GUWAHATI
781001 PS BHARALUMUKH DISTRICT KAMRUP METRO ASSAM
VERSUS
1: UNION OF INDIA AND 5 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO TEH
MINISTRY OF FINANCE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA NEW DELHI
2:THE ASSISTANT / DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
CIRCLE 4 GUWAHATI ROOM NO. 502 5TH FLOOR AAYAKAR BHAWAN
CHRISTIAN BASTI GS ROAD PO GUWAHATI PS DISPUR DISTRICT KAMRUP
METRO ASSAM
3:ADDITIONAL / JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX RANGE 4
GUWAHATI AAYAKAR BHAWAN CHRISTIAN BASTI GS ROAD PO
GUWAHATI PS DISPUR DISTRICT KAMRUP METRO ASSAM
4:PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER / COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
GUWAHATI 2 GUWAHATIAAYAKAR BHAWAN CHRISTIAN BASTI GS ROAD
PO GUWAHATI PS DISPUR DISTRICT KAMRUP METRO ASSAM
5:PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CCA NER
GUWAHATI OFFICE OF THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME
TAX NER FIRST FLOOR AAYAKAR BHAWAN CHRISTIAN BASTI GS ROAD
Page No.# 5/8
PO GUWAHATI PS DISPUR DISTRICT KAMRUP METRO ASSAM
6:CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES REPRESENTED BY ITS
CHAIRPERSON UNDER THE MINISTRY OF FINANCE DEPARTMENT OF
REVENUE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA NORTH BLOCK NEW DELHI 110001
For the Appellant(s) : Dr. A. Saraf, Sr. Advocate, assisted by Mr. N.N. Dutta, Mr. S.J. Saikia,
Mr. P.K. Bora and Mr. B. Sarma, Advocates.
For the Respondent(s) : Mr. P.S. Bhattacharyya, Central Government Counsel.
: Mr. K. Jain, Advocate on behalf of Mr. S.C. Keyal, Standing Counsel,
Income Tax Department.
-B E F O R E -
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. ASHUTOSH KUMAR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY
03.09.2025
(Ashutosh Kumar, CJ)
Heard Dr. A. Saraf, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. N.N. Dutta
for the appellants in all these appeals.
The assail is to the judgment dated 21.07.2025 passed by a learned
Single Judge of this Court in several writ petitions, refusing to interfere with the
re-opening of the assessment under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961
(hereinafter to be referred as the "I.T. Act").
The contention of the appellants is that in the "reasons to believe"
under Section 148 of the I.T. Act, no sufficient ground has been mentioned by
the Income Tax Officer.
Dr. Saraf has submitted that the proviso to Section 147 of the I.T. Act
has not at all been considered by the learned Single Judge.
Under Section 147 of the I.T. Act, if the Assessing Officer has reasons
to believe that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for any
assessment year, he may, subject to the provisions of Sections 148 to 153,
assess or re-assess such income and also any other income chargeable to tax,
Page No.# 6/8
which has escaped the assessment and which comes to his notice subsequently
in the course of proceedings under this Section or re-compute the loss or the
depreciation allowance or any other allowance, as the case may be, for the
assessment year concerned.
The proviso to Section 147 further delineates that if an assessment
under Section 143(3) has been made for the relevant assessment year, then no
action shall be taken under Section 147 after the expiry of 4(four) years from
the end of the relevant assessment year, unless - (i) any income chargeable to
tax has escaped the assessment for such assessment year by reason of failure
on the part of the assessee to make a return under Section 139 or (ii) in
response to a notice issued under Sub-Section (1) of Section 142 or Section 148
or to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for his assessment for
that assessment year. [Emphasis provided]
The reasons recorded under Section 148 of the I.T. Act only mentions
that capital to the tune of Rs.1,51,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore Fifty One Lakhs)
was generated by allotment of shares which existed only on paper with no
corresponding documents.
It was inferred from the data prepared by DIT (Investigation), Kolkata
that all the Companies belonged to Narendra Kumar Jain, who during the course
of survey, had sworn on oath that he is an accommodation entry provider, who
provided bogus accommodation entries, bogus unsecured loans, etc.
The Assessing Officer thus concluded that there were reasons to
believe that the assessee's income of Rs.1,51,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore Fifty
One Lakhs) was chargeable to tax for the financial year 2009-10 which was
relevant to assessment year 2010-11, which had escaped assessment within the
meaning of Section 147 of the I.T. Act justifying the issuance of notice under
Page No.# 7/8
Section 148 of the I.T. Act. There was but no disclosure in the assessment of
the Assessing Officer that the income which escaped assessment was because
of omission or failure on the part of the assessee.
Dr. Saraf, learned Senior Advocate submits that the proviso to Section
147 is very clear. 2(two) conditions are required to be satisfied before an
Assessing Officer acquires the jurisdiction to issue notice under Section 148 I.T.
Act in respect of an assessment beyond the period of 4(four) years, namely, (i)
that he must have reasons to believe that the income chargeable to tax has
escaped assessment, and (ii) that he must have reasons to believe that such
income has escaped the assessment by reason of the omission or failure on the
part of the assessee to make a return under Section 139 for the assessment
year to the Income Tax Officer or to disclose fully and truly material facts
necessary for his assessment for that year. [Emphasis provided]
The requirement under law is that both the conditions must co-exist.
Thus, it has been contended that the only duty cast upon an assessee
is to make full and true disclosure of the primary facts at the time of original
assessment. If that were not done, that only could have been the starting point
of re-assessment under Section 147. Merely because nil income/profit was
shown by the appellants, it could not have been inferred that no disclosure was
made, especially when the assessment under Section 143(3) was accepted by
the Department more than 4(four) years ago.
The duty of the assessee, it has been argued, is to disclose primary
facts. He is under no obligation to inform or to educate how the Assessing
Officer should draw inferences from the primary facts.
There is also no satisfaction of the Assessing Officer that the primary
facts were not disclosed by the assessee.
Page No.# 8/8
Re-assessment after 4(four) years on the change of opinion of the
Assessing Officer is not permissible.
Mr. Saraf, therefore, contends that the notice under Section 148 is
defective and this aspect was completely overlooked by the learned Single
Judge while deciding the writ petitions against the appellants.
Let notice be issued to the respondents/Income Tax Department,
which is accepted by Mr. K. Jain, Junior to Mr. S.C. Keyal, counsel for the Income
Tax Department.
Let the response of the Income Tax Department be filed by the next
date.
Re-notify on 03.11.2025.
In the meantime, the process of assessment may continue but no final
assessment shall be pronounced by the Income Tax Department.
JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE
Comparing Assistant
