9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (5) TMI 1535 - AT - Income TaxValidity of reopening of assessment - pendency of proceedings u/s 153A - Held that - As per the statutory scheme and provisions of the Act, during the pendency of proceedings u/s 153A of the Act, the AO is not empowered to issue notice u/s 147/148 of the Act. Therefore, we hold that the reassessment proceedings for assessment year 2003-04 suffer from basic defect of the re-assessment notice being illegal and, therefore, the re-assessment proceedings cannot be sustained. Case of Nilofer Hameed vs. ITO 1998 (8) TMI 75 - KERALA HIGH COURT to be followed. - Decided in favour of assessee
Issues:
1. Reopening of the case under section 147 2. Addition of loan received from M/s. K.V.F. Securities Pvt. Ltd. 3. Disallowance of interest expenses on unsecured loan 4. Validity of reassessment proceedings during pendency of other proceedings Analysis: Issue 1: Reopening of the case under section 147 The case involved two appeals by the assessee against orders passed by the Ld. CIT(A) for assessment years 2003-04 and 2004-05. The Ld. CIT(A) allowed the assessee's appeal for 2003-04, stating that no addition could be made without incriminating material found during the search. However, the department filed an appeal before the Tribunal challenging this decision. The Tribunal restored the matter back to the CIT(A) for re-adjudication. Meanwhile, the department initiated reassessment proceedings against the assessee for 2003-04, which were completed. The assessee contended that the reassessment proceedings were bad in law as they were initiated during the pendency of other proceedings, which is not permissible. The Tribunal held that the reassessment proceedings were illegal and quashed them. Issue 2: Addition of loan received from M/s. K.V.F. Securities Pvt. Ltd. The dispute in assessment year 2004-05 was regarding the interest paid on a loan received from M/s. K.V.F. Securities Pvt. Ltd. The Ld. CIT(A) upheld the addition of the loan amount to the assessee's income for 2003-04. The assessee challenged this addition, arguing that it was baseless and unjustified. The Tribunal, after quashing the reassessment proceedings for 2003-04, also deleted the impugned addition for 2004-05 as it followed from the illegal reassessment proceedings. Issue 3: Disallowance of interest expenses on unsecured loan The Ld. CIT(A) had confirmed the disallowance of interest expenses on an unsecured loan in both assessment years. The assessee contended that this disallowance was baseless and unjustified. However, since the reassessment proceedings were quashed, the Tribunal did not address this issue separately. Issue 4: Validity of reassessment proceedings during pendency of other proceedings The main contention was whether reassessment proceedings initiated during the pendency of other proceedings were legal. The Tribunal referred to judicial precedents and held that such parallel proceedings on the same subject matter are not permissible. It was established that the reassessment proceedings for 2003-04 were illegal due to being initiated during the pendency of other proceedings. Consequently, the reassessment proceedings were quashed, leading to the deletion of the impugned addition for 2004-05 as well. In conclusion, both appeals of the assessee were allowed by the Tribunal, and the reassessment proceedings for 2003-04 were quashed, leading to the deletion of the impugned addition for 2004-05.
|
