| The Tax Publishers2020 TaxPub(DT) 3941 (Mad-HC) : (2020) 428 ITR 0379 INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 147
Where even though notice under section 148 was issued one day before end of the four year period, all details were available at first instance before AO in the scrutiny assessment, thus, attempt of AO by invoking power under section 147 was, in fact, to review earlier assessment order, which was impermissible.
|
Reassessment - Validity - Notice under section 148 issued one day before end of four years period - All details available before AO during scrutiny assessment
Issue was as regards validity of reopening of assessment under section 147. Revenue challenged order of Tribunal holding that revenue had no jurisdiction to reopen case of the assessee beyond the period of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year. Case of revenue was that notice under section 148 was issued before expiry of four years from end of relevant assessment year. Revenue was seeking to treat business loss claimed by the assessee as a speculative loss. Held: Notice under section 148 was issued one day before end of the four year period. Even if it was so, statute mandates that AO has to have reasons to believe that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment and there are long line of decisions which say that there should be material to show that the income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. In instant case all details were available at first instance before AO in the scrutiny assessment. In such circumstances, attempt of AO by invoking power under section 147 was, in fact, to review earlier assessment order. Reopening, based upon a change of opinion or a review of decision taken by AO is impermissible
Followed:CIT, Delhi v. M/s. Kelvinator of India Limited 2010 (187) Taxman.312 (SC) : 2010 TaxPub(DT) 1335 (SC)
REFERRED : Tractors and Farm Equipment Limited v. Asstt. CIT 2019 TaxPub(DT) 0011 (Mad-HC) The Pr. CIT 6, Chennai v. Santech Solutions (P) Ltd. 2018 (97) Taxmann.com 179 (Madras) : 2018 TaxPub(DT) 5786 (Mad-HC) CIT v. Ashley Services Limited 2014 (44) Taxmann.com 44 (Madras) : 2014 TaxPub(DT) 2644 (Mad-HC) M/s. Rabo India Finance Limited. v. Dy. CIT and others 2013 (34) taxmann.com 228 (Bombay) : 2014 TaxPub(DT) 1244 (Bom-HC) M/s. Shree Laxmi Jewellery (P) Ltd., v. v. The ACIT, Central Circle-1 (3), Chennai and Vice-Versa. [I.T.A.No.3345/Mds/2016, CO No.15/Mds/2017 (in ITA No.3345/Mds/2016), dt. 12-9-2017] The Assistant CIT, Company Circle--II (4), Chennai v. M/s. Kanishk Gold (P) Ltd. [ITA No. 1323/Mds/2012, dt. 5-5-2014] Sharp Electronics Private Limited. v. Asstt. CIT. 1995 TaxPub(DT) 1050 (Mad-Trib)
FAVOUR : In assessee's favour
A.Y. : 2009-10
 SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT
|