Bandyopadhyay, AM - (1.) IN this case, assessments were originally completed under section 143(3) for all the three years. After delivery of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of State Bank of Travancore v. CIT [1986] 158 ITR 102/24 Taxman 337, the Assessing Officer wrote a letter to the assessee-bank asking for details of interest amounts credited to the suspense account for all these three years. Notices under section 154 were also issued by the Assessing Officer for all the three years, on 21-8-1987 seeking to rectify the assessments by including the amounts of interest credited to suspense account in the respective assessments. Later-on, however, the Assessing, Officer did not proceed further with the rectification proceedings under section 154. On the other hand, he reopened the assessments by issuing notices under section 148 on 19-11-1987. All the assessments were completed under section 143(3) read with section 147 on 4-2-1988. IN the re-assessment, the amounts of interest credited to the suspense accounts were added back.
(2.) In the first appeals, the CIT (Appeals) held that the pronouncement by the Supreme Court will certainly have to be treated as an information for taking action under section 147(a) of the Act, as the Supreme Court formulates the law of the land. Accordingly, he held that the action of the Assessing Officer in initiating proceedings under section 147(a) was valid. The CIT (Appeals) thus upheld the re-assessments for all the years. The assessee has come up in further appeals before us. It has candidly been admitted by the learned counsel for the assessee appearing before us that on merits, the assessee does not have any case inasmuch as in accordance with the abovementioned judgment of the Supreme Court, the amounts of interest credited to the suspense accounts are liable to be treated as income accruing to the assessee. For assessment years 1983-84 and 1984-85 again, the learned counsel for the assessee has admitted that by using the abovementioned judgment of the Supreme Court as "information", the Assessing Officer could have validly reopened the proceedings under section 147(b). The assessment orders for these two years mention the assessments as having been completed under section 143(3) read with section 147(a) / (b). The learned counsel for the assessee thus submits that if the proceedings be considered as having been completed under section 143(3) read with section 147(b), there is nothing to object to. Hence, we also hold that so far as assessment years 1983-84 and 1984-85 are concerned, the re-assessment proceedings initiated under section 147(b) and re-assessment orders passed consequent thereto have got to be considered as valid. Accordingly, we uphold these assessments.
(3.) SO far as however assessment year 1982-83 is concerned, the matter stands at a different footing. The time-limit for issue of notice in a proceeding under section 147(b) had clearly elapsed for this year on 31-3-1987 whereas the impugned notice under section 148 was actually issued on 19-11-1987 only. Hence, this notice is to be considered as one for initiating the re-assessment proceedings under section 147(a) alone. The learned counsel for the assessee contends in this connection that since there was neither concealment nor lack of disclosure of any material facts at the stage of the original assessment, the Assessing Officer was not empowered to initiate proceedings under section 147(a) for this year.;