AMRUT TALKIES Vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER SECOND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) M/s. Amrut Talkies, Hubli, common petitioner in these petitions, is a registered partnership firm and is engaged in the business of running a cinema theatre in the city of Hubli. The petitioner is an assessee under the I.T. Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), on the file of the Second Income-tax Officer, Hubli Circle, Hubli (hereinafter referred to as "the ITO").

(2.) FOR the assessment years 1974-75 and 1975-76 (relevant to the periods ending on October 26, 1973, and November 13, 1974, respectively, the petitioner filed its returns before the ITO, inter alia, disclosing that it had constructed a permanent theatre at a cost of Rs. 4,79,050 or so supported by a valuation report of a registered valuer (Exhibit A) in support of the cost of construction of the theatre. On an examination of the returns filed by the petitioner, the ITO by his assessment orders dated March 31, 1975, and June 1, 1976 (Exhibits B and C) completed the assessments for the aforesaid years accepting the cost of construction as estimated by the registered valuer.

(3.) SRI G. Sarangan, the learned counsel for the petitioner, has contended that the later report of the official valuer on the cost of construction of a building, having regard to the fact that the same varies from person to person from time to time, place and from valuer to valuer, does not constitute an information as to a fact to justify the reopening of the concluded assessments. In support of his contention, SRI Sarangan has strongly relied on the ruling of the Bombay High Court in Tulsidas Kilachand v.D.R. Chawla (1980) 122 ITR 458 (Bom) and "From our Reporter at the Supreme Court" reported in (1983) 141 ITR (St.) 47 (D. R. Chawla WTO v. Ram Das Kilachand) to the effect that the Supreme Court has dismissed S.L.P. (Civil) No. 5663 of 1980 under the heading "Reassessment : Departmental valuer's report : Whether constitutes 'information'."