9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Validity of re-opening assessments under s. 147(a). 2. Merits of the case for disputed additions made under s. 64(1)(iv). Detailed Analysis: 1. Validity of re-opening assessments under s. 147(a): The judgment involves three appeals regarding re-assessments for three successive years of the same assessee, heard together and disposed of by a common order. The assessee, a business proprietor, advanced a sum to his minor son, which was later disclosed in the balance sheet under a different name. The Income Tax Officer (ITO) re-opened the assessments under s. 147(a) based on the son's admission to a partnership firm. The assessee contended that the provisions of s. 64(1)(iv) were not applicable as he had received back the loan amount. The Tribunal found that the reassessments were without jurisdiction as the assessee had fully and truly disclosed all material facts necessary for assessments, thus canceling the re-assessments. 2. Merits of the case for disputed additions made under s. 64(1)(iv): The ITO made re-assessments including income from the son's share in the partnership firm, relying on s. 64(1)(iv). The assessee challenged the validity of the re-opening of assessments and the merits of the disputed additions. The Tribunal held that since the assessee had disclosed all relevant facts initially, the re-assessments were not justified. Therefore, the Tribunal allowed the appeals based on the finding that the re-opening of assessments was not relevant, without delving into other points raised by the assessee's representative. In conclusion, the Tribunal found that the re-assessments under s. 147(a) were invalid as the assessee had fully disclosed all material facts necessary for assessments, leading to the cancellation of the reassessments. The Tribunal did not address other points raised by the assessee's representative, as the appeals were allowed based on the preliminary finding regarding the jurisdiction of the re-opening of assessments.
|
