2017 (12) TMI 1586 - HC - Income Tax

Validity of reopening of assessment u/s 147 - reasons to believe - Held that - the finding of fact is that the Assessing Officer had an occasion to examine the details. The finding makes it clear that the Assessing Officer had an occasion to examine the details. In fact, it is mentioned that the details were considered not only by the Assessing Officer but also by CIT (Appeals). This is purely a finding of fact recorded by the Appellate Tribunal. In fact, in paragraph 22, it is reiterated that the authorities had examined various details and had come to a different conclusion. The findings which we have quoted above are not shown to be perverse. Hence, no substantial question of law arises.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to impugned judgment and order dated 2nd January, 2015 in relation to Appeal bearing ITA No.6416/ Mum/2010 under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Income Tax Act. Examination of details by Assessing Officer and authorities. Failure to obtain authorization not previously agitated.

Analysis:

The appeal in question stemmed from an order made by the Assessing Officer under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Income Tax Act. The respondent-assessee challenged this order by appealing to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), where the order under Section 147 was dismissed. Subsequently, the respondent appealed to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, which allowed the appeal. The appellant contested the impugned judgment, primarily focusing on the Assessing Officer's examination of details and the issue of failure to obtain authorization.

The appellant's counsel highlighted a specific finding in paragraph 23 of the impugned judgment, arguing that there was no explicit confirmation that the Assessing Officer had indeed examined and considered the details in question. Additionally, the appellant raised the issue of failure to obtain authorization, emphasizing that this matter had not been raised before the authorities earlier and, therefore, could not have been brought up for the first time before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.

The Appellate Tribunal's factual finding in paragraph 23 indicated that the Assessing Officer had indeed reviewed the details provided by the assessee, a point that was further reinforced by the CIT (Appeals) also considering these details. The Tribunal's findings in paragraphs 22 and 23 supported the conclusion that the revenue authorities had scrutinized the details and arrived at a different conclusion, citing relevant legal precedents from the Delhi High Court and the Supreme Court to emphasize the necessity of having a reason to believe to reopen proceedings.

Given the factual findings and the absence of any indication that the Assessing Officer failed to examine the details, the High Court dismissed the appeal, stating that no substantial question of law arose from the case. The judgment underscored the importance of factual findings and the lack of perversity in the Tribunal's conclusions, ultimately upholding the decision of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.