|
The Tax Publishers2020 TaxPub(DT) 3949 (Mad-HC) : (2021) 430 ITR 0060 : (2020) 275 TAXMAN 0606 INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 147
Where original assessment was completed under section 143(3), wherein AO noted differences between charges received as per TDS Certificate and charges offered in profit and loss account, thereafter reopening assessment beyond four years was a clear change of opinion and did not satisfy the requirements to be fulfilled in terms of 1st proviso to section 147.
|
Reassessment - Validity - AO already examined differences between charges received as per TDS Certificate and charges offered in profit and loss account in scrutiny assessment proceedings -
Assessee was a liasoning agent and trading in medical equipments. Subsequently, case was selected for scrutiny and assessment was completed under section 143(3). After period of four years and within period of six years, assessment was reopened assessment on allegation that there was differences between services charges offered by assessee in profit and loss account and received as per TDS certificate. Revenue alleged that mere production of records and account books before AO would not necessarily amount to disclosure within meaning of 'Disclosure' as mentioned under 1st proviso to section 147. Held: AO himself stated that after assessment was completed under section 143(3) on perusal of the records, it was seen from the profit and loss account that there was differences between charges received as per TDS Certificate and charges offered in the profit and loss account. When assessment was completed under section 143(3), that aspect, was noted by AO, namely differences between charges received as per TDS Certificate and charges offered in profit and loss account and that perhaps was reason for AO to record TDS credit was as per NSDL. Tribunal was fully justified in holding that reopening the assessment beyond four years was a clear change of opinion and did not satisfy the requirements to be fulfilled in terms of 1st proviso to section 147.
REFERRED : Shri. B. Suresh Kumar v. ITO Corporate Ward 3 (4) [I.T.A. No. 1152/Chny/2019, dt. 17-2-2020]
FAVOUR : In assessee's favour
A.Y. :
SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT |