2023 (2) TMI 750 - AT - Income Tax

Reopening of assessment u/s 147 - assessee had entered into cash transactions exceeding Rs.10,00,000 in a month, resulting in escapement of income - HELD THAT - A reading of the reasons recorded would show that the AO on the basis of information down loaded from the system of the department found that in the year under consideration, assessee had entered into cash transaction exceeding Rs.10,00,000 in a month. AO has not elaborated in the reasons recorded, what is the nature of information received and what is the nature of cash transaction, whether, deposits in any bank account, cash purchases, cash receipts etc. As in the reasons recorded, AO has referred to three different assessment years in three paragraphs. While, in paragraph 1, he has referred to assessment year 2011-12, in paragraph 2, he has referred to assessment year 2010- 11 and finally in paragraph 3, he has formed a belief that income of Rs.10,00,000 chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for assessment year 2008-09. Thus, the reasons recorded make it amply clear that AO has acted mechanically and without application of mind to the facts and material on record. Such lackadaisical approach for reopening of assessment u/s 147 cannot be condoned. For this reason alone, the reopening of assessment u/s 147 has to be declared invalid as there is no nexus between the information available with the Assessing Officer and formation of belief. Appeal of assessee allowed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Validity of assessment order passed under Section 147/143(3) of the Income-Tax Act, 1961.
2. Various additions made by the Assessing Officer.
3. General nature of ground nos. 12, 13, and 14.

Validity of Assessment Order (Ground nos. 1 to 4):
The appellant challenged the validity of the assessment order passed under Section 147/143(3) of the Income-Tax Act, 1961. The Assessing Officer reopened the assessment alleging cash transactions exceeding Rs.10,00,000 in a month, leading to an escapement of income. The appellant contended that there was no live link between the material available and the formation of belief by the Assessing Officer. The reasons recorded for reopening lacked specificity and showed a lack of application of mind. The Tribunal held that the reopening of assessment was invalid due to the absence of a nexus between the information available and the formation of belief.

Additions Made by Assessing Officer (Ground nos. 5 to 11):
The Assessing Officer made various additions to the total income of the appellant, including share premium, donations, loss on sale of machinery, ROC fee, service tax demand, additional sales-tax, and depreciation claim. The appellant appealed these additions before the Commissioner (Appeals). The Tribunal found that the additions made were unsustainable as the Assessing Officer did not add the alleged escaped income for which the assessment was reopened. It was held that in a proceeding under Section 147, additions cannot be made without addressing the primary issue of escaped income. Relying on legal precedents, the Tribunal quashed the assessment order and set aside the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals).

General Nature of Ground nos. 12, 13, and 14:
Ground nos. 12, 13, and 14 were of a general nature and did not involve specific legal issues. The Tribunal did not provide detailed analysis of these grounds in the judgment.

In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, declaring the assessment order invalid and quashing the additions made by the Assessing Officer. The decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) was set aside, emphasizing the importance of addressing the primary issue of escaped income in proceedings under Section 147 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961.