K RAJIV Vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal, by the legal representative of the deceased assessee - one late Mr.M.S.Krishnamurthy, is directed against the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'D' Bench in ITA.No.246/Mds/2017 for the assessment year 2002-03, raising the the following substantial questions of law :

(2.) The assessee filed the return of income on 112002 for the assessment year 2002-03 admitting a total income of Rs. 3,51,885/-. The return was processed under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for brevity, the Act) and an intimation was received by the Assessing Officer of the assessee from the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle I (3), Chennai that M/s.Citadel Aurobindo Biotech Limited (hereinafter called the CABL) had paid a sum of Rs. 6 Crores to the assessee being non compete fee and that the payment of such an amount had been agreed to be paid during the financial year relevant to the assessment year 2002-03.

(3.) Based on such intimation, the assessment was reopened by issuance of a notice dated 22009 under Section 148 of the Act. The assessee sent a reply dated 30.2009 requesting that the original return filed might be treated as the return filed in response to the notice under Section 148 of the Act and also requested the reasons for reopening. The reasons for reopening were furnished by the Assessing Officer vide letter dated 25.8.2009. Subsequently, a notice under Section 143(2) of the Act dated 18.9.2009 was issued, in response to which, the assessee filed the reply dated 010.2009.