Madras High Court
Indian Syntans Investments Pvt. Ltd vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax on 24 June, 2025
W.A. No.2176 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 24.06.2025
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.K.R.SHRIRAM, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN
W.A.No.2176 of 2021
and C.M.P.No.13751 of 2021
Indian Syntans Investments Pvt. Ltd.,
Rep. by its Director, Mr.N.Narayanan
No.71, Third Main Road, Kasturba Nagar,
Adyar, Chennai 600 020. .. Appellant
-vs-
The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,
Company Circle II (3),
121, Nungambakkam High Road,
Chennai 600 034. .. Respondent
Prayer: Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent against the order
dated 28.04.2021 passed in W.P.No.14021 of 2014 on the file of this Court.
For Appellant : Mr.R.Sivaraman
For Respondent : Mr.B.Ramana Kumar
Sr. Standing Counsel
Page 1 of 5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/06/2025 08:37:14 pm )
W.A. No.2176 of 2021
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by the Hon'ble Chief Justice)
We see no reason to interfere with the impugned order. It cannot be
said that there is no tangible material and the learned Single Judge was
correct in dismissing the writ petition and permitting re-assessment to
proceed with.
2. Though it is correct that an Assessing Officer cannot reopen an
assessment merely on the basis of change of opinion even within a period
of four years and he has no power to review an assessment which has been
concluded, but where he has tangible material to come to the conclusion
that there is an escapement of income from assessment, the power to
reopen can be exercised. At the stage when the Assessing Officer reopens
an assessment, it is not necessary that the material before the Court should
conclusively prove or establish that income has escaped assessment. The
reason to believe at the stage of re-opening is all that is relevant.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/06/2025 08:37:14 pm )
3. We find support for this view from the judgment of the Apex Court
in Asst. CIT vs. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers P. Ltd.1, which has
been referred to in a Division Bench judgment of the Bombay High Court in
the case of Export Credit Guarantee Corporation of India Ltd. vs.
Additional Commissioner of Income Tax2.
4. Therefore, keeping open all rights and contentions of the assessee
including the fact that there is no case for re-assessment, we direct the
Assessing Officer to go ahead with the re-assessment proceedings. If the
assessee wishes to make any further submissions, the assessee may file the
same within thirty days from the date this order is uploaded. Before
passing a final order, a personal hearing shall be given to the assessee,
notice whereof shall be communicated at least five working days in
advance. Any order or judicial pronouncements of any Court or Tribunal
that the Assessing Officer is going to rely on, list thereof be made available
to assessee along with the notice of personal hearing. The order to be
passed shall be a reasoned order dealing with all issues.
1(2007) 291 ITR 500 (SC)
2(2013) 30 taxmann.com 211 (Bombay)
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/06/2025 08:37:14 pm )
With the aforesaid directions/observations, the appeal is dismissed.
There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the interim application
stands closed.
(K.R.SHRIRAM, CJ.) (SUNDER MOHAN, J.)
24.06.2025
Index : Yes/No
Neutral Citation : Yes/No
sra
To
The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,
Company Circle II (3),
121, Nungambakkam High Road,
Chennai 600 034.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/06/2025 08:37:14 pm )
The Hon'ble Chief Justice
and
Sunder Mohan, J.
(sra)
24.06.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/06/2025 08:37:14 pm )
