2020 (2) TMI 1382 - AT - Income Tax

Validity of reopening of assessment - absence of conditions precedent for issuance of notice u/s 148 - undisclosed income - HELD THAT - From the the reasons it is clear that the Assessing Officer has not formed an opinion at all about the existence of the concealed income. Assessing Officer merely desires to verify a claim of investment. Assessing Officer further underlines the necessity to unearth the undisclosed income . Assessing Officer failed to crystallize the existence of fact of concealed income. After hearing both the parties and considering the said order of the Tribunal in assessee s own case 2019 (10) TMI 905 - ITAT PUNE find identical issue already adjudicated by the Tribunal and decided the same in favour of the assessee. Assessing Officer was not justified in taking recourse to the provisions of section 147 - Decided in favour of assessee.

Issues involved:
1. Validity of reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
2. Confirmation of addition under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
3. Permission to amend grounds of appeal.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Validity of reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961:

The primary issue in the appeals was the validity of the reassessment proceedings initiated by the Assessing Officer (AO) under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee argued that the reassessment proceedings were invalid as the conditions precedent for issuance of notice under Section 148 were not met. The AO initiated reassessment based on information from local enquiries and media reports, aiming to verify investments and unearth undisclosed income. However, the Tribunal found that the AO had not formed an opinion about the existence of concealed income and merely desired to verify the investment claims. The Tribunal noted that the AO's reasons for reopening the assessment were based on a need for verification rather than any tangible material indicating escaped income. Citing the assessee's own case in earlier assessment years, where similar reassessment proceedings were quashed, the Tribunal held that the AO was not justified in invoking Section 147 for a mere verification of claims. Consequently, the initiation of reassessment proceedings and the consequential assessment order were set aside.

2. Confirmation of addition under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961:

The second issue was the confirmation of addition under Section 68 by the AO, which was upheld by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)]. The AO had added an amount to the assessee's income under Section 68, treating it as unexplained cash credit. However, since the Tribunal set aside the reassessment proceedings on legal grounds, the adjudication of the merits of this addition became academic. Thus, the Tribunal did not delve into the merits of the addition under Section 68.

3. Permission to amend grounds of appeal:

The assessee sought permission to amend the grounds of appeal. However, given the Tribunal's decision to set aside the reassessment proceedings, this request became redundant and was dismissed as academic.

Conclusion:

The Tribunal allowed the appeal on the legal issue of the validity of reassessment proceedings, setting aside the initiation of reassessment and the consequential assessment order. As a result, the other grounds related to the merits of the addition under Section 68 were dismissed as academic. The decision in ITA No.1740/PUN/2019 was applied mutatis mutandis to the other appeals (ITA Nos.1741, 1742 & 1743/PUN/2019), leading to their partial allowance as well. The reassessment proceedings in all four appeals were found to be invalid, and the appeals were partly allowed.

← Previous Next →