9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (10) TMI 924 - AT - Income TaxReopening of assessment - reopening of assessment was based on information of revenue audit party and not that of Assessing Officer - Held that - The co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ITO vs. Object Connect India Pvt. Ltd. (2014 (2) TMI 886 - ITAT HYDERABAD) has dismissed the appeal of the Revenue on the ground that there was absolutely no fresh information provided or collected in the re-assessment proceedings In view of the ratio laid down by the Hon ble Delhi High Court in case of Usha International 2012 (9) TMI 767 - DELHI HIGH COURT and the observations of the coordinate bench in case of S. Ranjit Reddy and Others (2013 (6) TMI 424 - ITAT HYDERABAD), we are of the opinion that the CIT(A) has rightly quashed the reopening of assessment made by the Assessing Officer u/s 147 of the Act by observing that there was absolutely no fresh information provided or collected. Accordingly, we uphold the order of the CIT(A) and dismiss the grounds raised by the revenue on this issue - Decided in favour of assessee.
Issues:
1. Disallowance of expenditure on replacement of CT scanner 2. Validity of reopening of assessment under section 147 3. Change of mind by the Income Tax Officer 4. Notice served after four years for reopening assessment 5. Allowance of claimed expenditure in full Issue 1: The Assessing Officer disallowed the expenditure of &8377; 22,00,000 claimed by the assessee towards the replacement of a CT scanner, holding it as capital expenditure. The Assessing Officer questioned the authenticity of the transaction as the assessee failed to provide details about the purchase of the CT scanner. The CIT(A) confirmed this disallowance, emphasizing that the scanner had been replaced in the current year as per the assessment order. Issue 2: The assessee challenged the validity of the reopening of assessment under section 147, arguing that there was no fresh material to warrant such reopening. The CIT(A) upheld the Assessing Officer's action, stating that the proviso for reopening assessments after four years had not yet come into play, giving the Assessing Officer wider leverage to reopen cases. The Tribunal, citing various decisions, including the case of ITO vs. Object Connect India Pvt. Ltd., agreed with the assessee and allowed the appeal, quashing the reopening of assessment. Issue 3: The Income Tax Officer's action in reopening the assessment was criticized as a "change of mind" on the same issue, which was deemed unlawful by the assessee. However, the Tribunal focused on the lack of fresh information or material justifying the reopening, ultimately ruling in favor of the assessee. Issue 4: The assessee contended that the notice for reopening the assessment was served after four years, questioning the timing of the notice. The Tribunal, considering the lack of fresh information and relying on legal precedents, upheld the assessee's appeal, emphasizing the importance of tangible material for justifying the reopening of assessments. Issue 5: The assessee requested the allowance of the claimed expenditure in full and challenged the validity of the reopening of the assessment. The Tribunal, following legal decisions and the precedent set by the co-ordinate Bench in a similar case, allowed the assessee's appeal, thereby granting the requested relief and dismissing the grounds raised by the revenue on this issue.
|
