KILLICK NIXON LTD., MUMBAI versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI AND ORS.

Citation: [2002] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 348 · Decided: 25-11-2002 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: RUMA PAL · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
KILLICK NIXON LTD., MUMBAI 
v. 
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI AND ORS. 
NOVEMBER 25, 2002 
B 
[RUMA PAL AND B.N. SRIKRISHNA, JJ.] 
Income Tax Act, 1961: 
Sections 142(1), 143, 90 and 91--Assessee filing return-Assessing 
C Officer disallowing certain claims-Appellate Authority upholding order of 
Assessing Officer in respect of certain items but setting aside the order with 
regard to four heads and remitting the matter to assessing authority-Assessing 
Officer giving effect to the appellate order, determining the assessed income 
and raising demand-Meanwhile assessee filing declaration under Kar Vivad 
D Samadhan Scheme-Tax arrears determined and paid-Designated authority 
issuing final certificate-Assessing Officer re-opening assessment-Correctness 
of-Held: Assessing Officer has no jurisdiction to reopen assessment since the 
order made by designated authority is considered order, conclusive in respect 
of tax arrears-However, if any material particular furnished in the declaration 
E is found to be false, assessment can be re-opened-Further the plea that 
Assessing Officer has not assessed the disputed heads while giving effect to 
Appellate order is not tenable since no demand notice/refund order could 
have been issued if the assessment was not complete-Kar Vivad Samadhan 
Scheme, 1998. 
p 
Appellant-assessee filed return for assessment year 1992-93, 
following by a revised return. Assessing Authority disallowed certain 
claims. Appellate Authority upheld the order of Assessing Officer in 
respect of certain claims, but set aside the assessment order with regard 
to four heads, viz, claim for bad debt, income from house property, 
determination of capital gains, disallowance under rule 6D and remitted 
G the matter to the assessing authority. Giving effect to the Appellate Order, 
the Assessing Officer determined the assessed income and raised the 
demand. Meanwhile Kar Vivad Samadhan Schei;ne, 1998 was passed. 
Appellant filed a declaration under the Scheme disclosing the assessed 
income and worked out the tax payable. Designated Authority determined 
H the tax arrears which was paid by the assessee and then the Designated 
348 
.. 
KILLICK NIXON LTD .. MUMBAI ,. DY. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX 
349 
Authority issued a fin~I certificate. Thereafter, Assessing Officer issued A 
notices to appellant under Section 142(1). Appellant objected but Assessing 
Officer refused to accept it as final closure of proceedings pertaining to 
assessment year 1992-93. Aggrieved appellant filed writ petition for 
quashing the notice which was dismissed. Hence the present appeal. 
Appellant-assessee contended that once. the assessment for the entire B 
year was settled by following the provisions of the Kar Vivad Samadhan 
Scheme and the Designated Authority after application of mind had made 
an order under Section 90 of the Act, which was complied with by making 
payment of the tax computed under the Scheme, there was no question of 
reopening any issue which were subject matters of the order of the C 
Designated Authority; and that the order of the Designated Authority is 
conclusive on all items/heads, which go into the computation of the total 
income of the assessee and not confined only to the heads of income in 
respect of which an appeal or reference may be pending. 
Respondent-Revenue Department contended that the Assessing D 
Officer while giving effect to the Appellate Order had not taken into 
account the four major heads of dispute. 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELO: I. The order to be made by the Designated Authority under 
Section 90 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is a considered order which is 
intended to be conclusive in respect of tax arrears and sums payable after 
such determination towards full and final settlement of tax arrears. Once 
the declarant makes payment of the amount so determined under Section 
E 
90, the immunity under Section 91 springs into effect. That upon such F 
declaration being made, tax arrears being determined, paid and certificate 
issued under the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, there is no jurisdiction 
for the Assessing Officer to reopen the assessment by a notice under 
Section 143 of the Acfexcept where the case falls under proviso (2) of sub-
section (I) of Section 90 as it is found that any material particular G 
furnished in the declaration is found to be false. It is not the case of the 
Revenue that any material particular furnished by appellant-assessee in 
the decla

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.