2020 (8) TMI 268 - AT - Income Tax

Validity of reopening of assessment u/s 147 - Eligibility of reason to believe - HELD THAT - There is no tangible material in this case. Admittedly, re-opening is done for mere verification of certain transactions. We will not dig into the merits of the issue and correctness of the addition at this stage without deciding on the legal issue. Re-opening is done for mere verification only. In our view, such attempts of the AO are not approved by the decisions of higher judicial authorities as well as the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunals. Absence of any tangible material, AO s reason of mere verification for re-opening the assessment, jurisdiction assumed by the AO in this case is not valid. Accordingly, relevant ground / additional grounds are allowed in favour of the assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Validity of reopening the assessment under section 148 of the Income Tax Act.
2. Dismissal of additional grounds challenging the reopening of the assessment by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals).
3. Addition of unexplained investment in loan.
4. Rejection of exemption claimed under section 54 of the Income Tax Act.
5. Disallowance of deduction claimed under section 54 from long-term capital gains.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Validity of Reopening Assessment
The appeal challenged the reopening of the assessment under section 148 of the Income Tax Act. The Assessee argued that the reopening was invalid and unsustainable in law as it was done solely to verify the genuineness of a loan transaction. The Assessee contended that without tangible material leading to the discovery of income escapement, reopening a completed assessment is legally flawed. The Tribunal referred to relevant case laws and held that the reopening for mere verification, without substantial grounds, was not valid. The Tribunal emphasized the need for tangible material to support reopening decisions.

Issue 2: Dismissal of Additional Grounds
The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) dismissed additional grounds challenging the reopening of the assessment, stating that the Assessee relied only on technicalities. The Assessee contended that the dismissal was erroneous. The Tribunal allowed the additional grounds, emphasizing the legal nature of the issues raised and the absence of new facts requiring investigation. The Tribunal relied on legal precedents supporting the admission of purely legal additional grounds without further factual inquiry.

Issue 3: Addition of Unexplained Investment
The Tribunal addressed the addition of an unexplained investment in a loan given by the Assessee. The Assessee disputed the addition of ?26,00,000 made by the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal found that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in upholding the addition, indicating a lack of proper justification for the addition. The Tribunal noted the Assessee's challenge to the addition and the failure to provide sufficient reasoning for the same.

Issue 4: Rejection of Exemption Claim
The Assessee's claim of exemption under section 54 of the Income Tax Act from long-term capital gains was rejected by the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal observed that the Assessing Officer wrongly assumed jurisdiction in the reassessment proceedings to reject the Assessee's claim. The Tribunal found discrepancies in the rejection of the exemption claim and highlighted the errors in the jurisdictional assumptions made by the Assessing Officer.

Issue 5: Disallowance of Deduction
The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) upheld the action of the Assessing Officer in denying the deduction claimed under section 54 from long-term capital gains. The Assessee challenged this decision, arguing against the disallowance of the deduction. The Tribunal reviewed the grounds raised by the Assessee and found merit in the arguments related to the denial of the deduction. The Tribunal emphasized the errors in dismissing the additional grounds challenging the disallowance and provided relief to the Assessee on these legal issues.

In conclusion, the Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, granting relief to the Assessee on the legal issues raised regarding the validity of reopening the assessment and the denial of deductions and exemptions under the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal's decision highlighted the importance of tangible material and legal grounds in assessment proceedings.