The High Court held
as under:
1) The law only
requires that the information on which the AO records his or her satisfaction
that income has escaped assessment, is communicated to the assessee, without
mandating the disclosure of any specific document;
2) Where the reasons
recorded had been communicated and it
provided (independent of the 2G Report referred to in the reasons) details
of the new and tangible information that support the AO's opinion, non-supply
of 2G Spectrum report prepared by DIT(Inv) to the assessee on the grounds of
confidentiality would not vitiate the proceedings initiated under section 147;
3) There is no legal
proposition that mandates the disclosure of any additional document. However,
the AO could not, in all cases, refuse to disclose documents relied upon by him
on account of confidentiality;
4) The principle
denying privilege or confidentiality would operate when no material is provided
in addition to the mere assertion of the subjective satisfaction of the AO;
5) Even then, the claim
for privilege may still prevail in that the Court may consider the manner in
which the documents were to be inspected, but such question did not arise in
the instant case, where concrete and specific details (which supported the
belief under section 147/148) were communicated to the assessee;
6) Thus, the non-disclosure of the 2G Spectrum
Report did not affect the impugned notice. - Acorus Unitech Wireless (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT [2014]
43 taxmann.com 62 (Delhi)
No comments:
Post a Comment