9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (8) TMI 482 - AT - Income TaxReopening of assessment - Assessment u/s 153A relied upon - Held that - It is an admitted fact, as also evident from the reasons recorded and the assessment order that the initiation of reopening proceedings was made by the Assessing Officer on the basis of information available with the AO. Thus respectfully following the decision of Co-ordinate Bench of the ITAT, Amritsar in the case of ACIT vs. Arun Kapur (2012 (6) TMI 403 - ITAT AMRITSAR) and Rajat Shubra Chatterji vs. ACIT, New Delhi 2016 (7) TMI 258 - ITAT DELHI hold that provisions of sec. 153C of the Act were applicable in the present case for framing the assessment, if any, which excludes the application of sec. 147 of the hence, notice issued under sec. 148 of the Act and assessment framed in furtherance thereto under sec. 147 read with section 143(3) of the Act are void ab initio. Hence, the reassessment in question is accordingly quashed. - Decided in favour of assessee.
Issues:
Appeals against CIT(A) order for AY 2007-08; Validity of proceedings u/s 147/148; Applicability of sec. 153C; Assessment after limitation period; Burden of proof on appellant; Alleged payment to Santosh Medical College; Natural justice principles violation; Appellate order legality; Grounds of appeal alteration. Issue 1: Validity of proceedings u/s 147/148 The assessee challenged the initiation of proceedings u/s 147/148, arguing lack of tangible material for income escapement belief and borrowed satisfaction from the Investigation Wing. The contention was that assessment should have been under sec. 153C based on search documents/information. The ITAT held that sec. 153C applied, not sec. 147, as per precedents like ACIT vs. Arun Kapur and Rajat Shubra Chatterji cases. The reassessment under sec. 147 was deemed void ab initio, quashed, and notice under sec. 148 and assessment under sec. 147 with sec. 143(3) were held invalid. Issue 2: Burden of Proof and Alleged Payment The CIT(A) upheld the addition of ?25,50,000 for alleged payment to Santosh Medical College, shifting the burden of proof to the appellant. The ITAT found the assessment invalid due to incorrect application of sec. 147 instead of sec. 153C, rendering the addition unsustainable. As the reassessment was quashed, the issue of alleged payment became moot. Issue 3: Violation of Natural Justice Principles The appellant contended that principles of natural justice were violated due to lack of cross-examination opportunity. However, the ITAT focused on the incorrect application of sec. 147, leading to the quashing of the reassessment. The issue of natural justice violation was not separately addressed in the judgment due to the primary grounds for invalidity. Issue 4: Legality of Appellate Order The appellant challenged the appellate order's legality as arbitrary, illegal, and against contemporary jurisprudence principles. The ITAT did not delve into the specifics of the appellate order's legality, as the primary focus was on the incorrect application of sec. 147, leading to the quashing of the reassessment. The appellate order's broader legality was not directly addressed due to the primary grounds for invalidity. Issue 5: Grounds of Appeal Alteration The appellant sought leave to add/alter grounds of appeal, a procedural request. The ITAT allowed the appeals based on the primary issue of incorrect application of sec. 147, leading to the quashing of the reassessment. The procedural request for altering grounds of appeal was not discussed separately as the primary grounds for invalidity were sufficient for allowing the appeals. In conclusion, the ITAT Delhi quashed the reassessment proceedings for AY 2007-08 due to the incorrect application of sec. 147 instead of sec. 153C, following precedents and holding the notice and assessment void ab initio. The appeals were allowed based on the primary issue of incorrect legal provisions applied, rendering other grounds moot. The judgment emphasized the importance of correctly applying relevant sections of the Income Tax Act to ensure the validity of assessment proceedings.
|
