The Tax Publishers2020 TaxPub(DT) 1225 (Del-Trib)

INCOME TAX ACT, 1961

Section 147

As evident, AO had not investigated the matter himself and had not made any enquiry to corroborate report of investigation on which basis case of assessee had been reopened, meaning thereby AO had not applied his mind and only issued notice under section 148 on the basis of CBI Report which had later been thoroughly investigated by CBI itself and assessee had been discharged by CBI on the basis of CBI Court decision. Since basic Report of CBI had remained no more, therefore, subsequent notice under section 148 was invalid as AO had acted mechanically and without any independent application of mind. Further, approval granted by the Addl. CIT under section 151 was mechanical and without application of mind, therefore, reassessment was quashed.

Reassessment - Reason to believe - Non-application of mind by AO - Reopening on the basis of CBI report remairing no more

AO based on CBI report reopened assessment by issuing section 148 notice and made addition. Assessee challenged reopening on the grounds of non-application of mind on AO's part.Held: As evident, AO had not investigated the matter himself and had not made any enquiry to corroborate report of investigation on which basis case of assessee had been reopened, meaning thereby AO had not applied his mind and only issued notice under section 148 on the basis of CBI Report which had later been thoroughly investigated by CBI itself and assessee had been discharged by CBI on the basis of CBI Court decision. Since basic Report of CBI had remained no more, therefore, subsequent notice under section 148 was invalid as AO had acted mechanically and without any independent application of mind. Further, approval granted by the Addl. CIT under section 151 was mechanical and without application of mind, therefore, reassessment was quashed.

REFERRED :

FAVOUR : In assessee's favour.

A.Y. : 2008-09

IN THE ITAT, DELHI BENCH

H.S. SIDHU, J.M.

Arina Grover v. ACIT

ITA No. 9316/Del/2019

20 February, 2020

In favour of assessee.

Assessee by: Rohit Tiwari, Advocate & Vinay Verma, Advocate

Department by: Pradeep Singh Gautam, Sr. DR.

ORDER

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals)-15, New Delhi on 16-10-2019 in relation to the assessment year 2008-09.

2. The brief facts of the case are that assessee filed her return of income on 22-2-2010 declaring income of Rs. 8,34,081 which was processed by the assessing officer under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called The Act). Thereafter, on the information from the Asstt. Director of Income Tax (Investigation), Unit I(2), New Delhi dated 10-3-2015 stating therein that during the course of search of office premises of the assessee, an agreement was found which was signed on 12-9-2007 between Sh. Kulwant Singh, S/o Sh. Natha Singh, R/o 2/27, Subhash Nagar, New Delhi and Mrs. Arina Grover wife of Sh. J.K. Grover for sale/purchase of property No. 2/27, Subhash Nagar, New Delhi. The sale consideration for the said deal was fixed at Rs. 95,00,000 and details of the same were also given in the agreement. But the sale deed was registered on 03.3.2008 for only Rs. 19,11,000. On the basis of this information, the reassessment proceedings were initiated under section 147 of the Act after taking approval of the Addl. CIT and notice under section 148 of the Act was issued upon the assessee on 27-3-2015. In response to the same, the AR of the Assessee appeared and filed a letter dated 27-4-2015 stating therein that the return filed under section 139 of the Act as return filed in compliance with notice under section 148 of the Act and also requested to provide copy of reasons recorded for issuing the notice under section 148 of the Act, which was provided by the assessing officer to himself.

SUBSCRIBE TaxPublishers.inSUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT