9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (6) TMI 481X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to notice issued under (1) of section 142 or section 148 or there is failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly material facts necessary for his assessment. Such specific finding could have been given after giving the opportunity to the AO, thus in the absence of such opportunity being given CIT(A) has acted against the principle of nature justice in reaching the conclusion that the reopening is barred by limitation. The clear cut finding of the CIT(A) is necessary. Assessee has taken the ground that the assessment has been made without issuing the notice under section 143(2) but the CIT(A) has not adjudicated this issue also. Thus set aside the order of the CIT(A) and restore this issue to the file of the CIT(A) to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g short levy of tax of Rs. 21,27,313/-. Therefore, I have reason to believe that the income of the assessee has escaped the assessment as per the section 147 of the IT Act. Issued Notice u/s 148. The approval of Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-IV, has been obtained on 19.02.2010." 3. In response, the assessee asked the assessing officer to take the original return as return filed in response to the notice issued under section 148 vide letter dated 09.04.2010 and after obtaining the copy of the reasons, the assessee filed the written submissions dated 15.10.2010 objecting the initiation of the reassessment proceedings, the assessing officer rejected the objections vide letter dated 16.102010. Subsequently, detailed submissions were ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d. In my decision vide ground of appeal 2.1 to 2.5, I have quashed the reopening of the assessment for A. Y. 2002-03 and grounds of appeal 2.1 to 2.5 have been allowed. Therefore, there is no need to adjudicate the ground of appeal No. 3 and 2.1. 7. In the result, the appeal is allowed." 4. Ld. DR before us vehemently contended that CIT(A) has held that the assessment was barred by limitation as reopening was not possible after the expiry of four years, in view of the proviso to section 147 of the Act but there was no finding given whether there was a failure on the part of the assessee to make the return by assessee, in response to notice under sub-section (1) of section 142 or section 148 or there is no failure to disclose fully and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g given by the ld. CIT(A) in his order that there was no failure on the part of the assessee to file the return or to disclose of the material facts truly and fully and opportunity being given to AO in this regard. He carried us towards the submission of the assessee but could not draw our attention towards the opportunity being given to AO by by the CIT(A). 7. We heard the rival submissions, and carefully considered the same and after going through the orders of the jurisdictional High Court and Bombay High Court, we are of the view that it is apparent from proviso to section 147 that reopening of the assessment proceeding cannot be initiated after expiry of the four years from the end of the assessment if there is no failure on the part ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
