9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (2) TMI 262 - AT - Income TaxReassessment u/s 147/148 of the Act quashed - Deletion made u/s 14A of the Act Proportionate management expenses Held that - Without bringing the 154 proceedings to any logical conclusion the assessing officer on the same set of facts and without there being any new information framed another satisfaction that it amounts to escapement of income and issued notice u/s 148 albeit after expiry of 4 years from the end of the assessment year - there is no allegation that there was any failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly material facts relevant for assessment of his income the CIT(A) has rightly observed by relying on CIT Vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. 2010 (1) TMI 11 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA - the reopening of assessment to be bad in law on the count that notice u/s 148 was issued after the time limit of 4 years which was not permissible and there was no allegation in the reasons recorded about the assessee having not furnished any true and full particulars of his income - The action u/s 148 was taken on the same set of facts and evidence on record, without any new information or evidence to sustain a new belief it amounts to change of opinion - Decided against Revenue.
Issues Involved:
1. Legality of reassessment under section 147/148 of the I.T. Act. 2. Deletion of addition under section 14A on account of proportionate management expenses. Issue-wise Detailed Analysis: 1. Legality of Reassessment under Section 147/148 of the I.T. Act: The core issue was whether the reassessment notice issued under section 147/148 was valid. The assessee's return for A.Y. 2005-06 was initially processed under section 143(1) and later completed under section 143(3). The assessing officer issued a notice under section 154 to disallow Rs. 51,08,274 under section 14A, which the assessee contested. Subsequently, a notice under section 148 was issued on the same grounds. The CIT(A) quashed the reassessment, observing: - The assessing officer did not allege any failure by the assessee to disclose fully and truly all relevant facts, which is a prerequisite under the proviso to section 147 for issuing a notice after four years. - The notice under section 148 was issued beyond the prescribed time limit of four years without any new information or material suggesting income escapement. - The reassessment was deemed a change of opinion, which is not permissible. The CIT(A) relied on several judgments, including Mercury Travels Ltd., CIT Vs. Purolator India Ltd., Atma Ram Properties Pvt. Ltd., and BLB Ltd., to conclude that the reassessment proceedings were invalid. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, emphasizing that: - The original assessment involved thorough scrutiny, and all material facts were disclosed by the assessee. - The notice under section 148 was issued beyond the statutory period without any new evidence or material. - The reassessment was based on the same facts and amounted to a change of opinion, which is not permissible under the law. 2. Deletion of Addition under Section 14A on Account of Proportionate Management Expenses: The assessing officer disallowed Rs. 51,08,274 under section 14A, which the CIT(A) deleted. The Tribunal noted that during the original assessment, the assessing officer had specifically inquired about the investments in mutual funds and their sources. The assessee provided detailed responses and supporting documents, which were verified by the assessing officer. The Tribunal observed: - The issue of income from mutual funds, sources of investment, and related expenses were considered during the original assessment. - The reassessment proceedings were initiated without any new material or evidence, solely based on a change of opinion. The Tribunal concluded that the CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition under section 14A, as the reassessment proceedings were invalid. The Tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeal, upholding the CIT(A)'s order in its entirety. Conclusion: The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to quash the reassessment proceedings under section 147/148 and delete the addition under section 14A. The reassessment was deemed invalid due to the lack of new material evidence, the notice being issued beyond the statutory period, and the proceedings amounting to a change of opinion. The revenue's appeal was dismissed.
|
