IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA                    CIVIL  APPELLATE JURISDICTION

               CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5313  OF  2008 (Arising out of SLP(C) No.21772/2008 (CC No.11258/2008)

 M/S. TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION PETITIONER(S)

Versus

COMMNR. OF INCOME TAX RESPONDENT (S)

J U D G M E N T

Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT,J.

   Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

Delay condoned.

Leave granted.

We are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order of the High Court.

The High Court has held that the Assessing Officer had disposed the proceedings

stating the penalty proceedings initiated in this case u/s 271 C read with Section 274 of

the Income Tax Act, 1961 are hereby dropped.   According to the High Court, there

was no basis indicated for dropping the proceedings.  The Tribunal referred to certain

aspects and held that the initiation of proceedings under Section 263 of the Income

Tax Act,  1961  (in  short,  the  I.T.Act)  was  impermissible  when considered  in  the

background of the materials  purportedly placed by the assessee before the Assessing

Officer.  What the High Court has done  is  to  require the  Assessing Officer to pass a

-2-

reasoned  order.   The  High Court  was  of  the  view that  Tribunal could  not  have

substituted its own reasonings which were required to be recorded by the Assessing

Officer.  According to the assessee all relevant aspects were placed for consideration

and if the officer did not record reasons, assessee can not be faulted.   

We do not think it necessary to interfere at this stage.  It goes  without saying

that when the matter be taken up by the Assessing Officer on remand, it shall be his

duty to take into account all the relevant aspects including the materials, if any, already

placed by the assessee, and pass a reasoned order.

The appeal is dismissed with the aforesaid observations.

......................J. (Dr.Arijit Pasayat)

......................J. (Dr.Mukundakam Sharma)

New Delhi, August 25, 2008