9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Validity of reopening assessment under s. 147(b) r/w s. 148 of the IT Act, 1961. 2. Compliance with provisions of sub-s. (2) of s. 148 regarding recording of reasons before issuing notice for reassessment. 3. Impact of settlement under the Voluntary Disclosure Scheme, 1975 on reassessment proceedings. Analysis: Issue 1: Validity of reopening assessment under s. 147(b) r/w s. 148 of the IT Act, 1961 The original assessment was reopened by the Income Tax Officer (ITO) based on information received regarding alleged payment of "on money" by the assessee to a housing society for the purchase of flats. The ITO added the amount to the assessee's income as income from undisclosed sources. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] held that the reassessment was void as the ITO failed to record reasons for reopening the assessment as required under s. 148(2). The CIT(A) also noted the lack of information to justify that the income had escaped assessment. Additionally, the settlement under the Voluntary Disclosure Scheme, 1975 was cited as covering the amount considered in reassessment, leading to the cancellation of the reassessment order. Issue 2: Compliance with provisions of sub-s. (2) of s. 148 regarding recording of reasons before issuing notice for reassessment The Appellate Tribunal emphasized the mandatory nature of recording reasons before issuing a notice for reassessment under s. 148(2). It was observed that there was no evidence on record to prove that the ITO had indeed recorded reasons before issuing the notice in this case. Despite specific opportunities, the ITO failed to produce any material showing the recording of reasons. Citing legal precedents, including decisions by the Allahabad High Court and the Calcutta High Court, the Tribunal affirmed that the recording of reasons is a prerequisite for assuming jurisdiction in reassessment proceedings. As there was no compliance with this mandatory provision, the reassessment order was canceled. Issue 3: Impact of settlement under the Voluntary Disclosure Scheme, 1975 on reassessment proceedings The settlement reached between the assessee and the CIT under the Voluntary Disclosure Scheme, 1975 was considered by the CIT(A) to cover the amount in question, preventing any further addition in the reassessment proceedings. This aspect was crucial in the decision to cancel the reassessment order. However, the Tribunal's focus on the lack of compliance with recording reasons under s. 148(2) rendered the discussion on the settlement somewhat secondary. In conclusion, the Appellate Tribunal dismissed the appeal, upholding the cancellation of the reassessment order primarily due to the non-compliance with the mandatory provision of recording reasons before issuing a notice for reassessment. The judgment underscores the significance of procedural requirements in reassessment proceedings under the IT Act, 1961.
|
