9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (9) TMI 1026X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... filed on 31/10/2004 admitting a total income of ₹ 27,46,999/-. As against the return of income, the assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of the Act on 30/08/2006 at a total income of ₹ 33,23,547/-. Subsequently, a notice dated 27/04/2010 u/s 148 of the Act was issued proposing to reopen the assessment on the ground of income has got escaped from the assessment. 3. On receipt of the order u/s 148 of the Act, the assessee objected to the proposed assessment and asked for reasons recorded for issuance of notice u/s 148 vide letter dated 28/04/2010. The assessee had not received the reasons recorded from the Assessing Officer. In the meanwhile, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s 143(3) read with section 14 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Act. i) There is no nexus between the reasons recorded and assessment framed. ii) The AO has travelled beyond the scope of section 147 of the Act, 1961 by making an addition, which is not the basis of initiation of reopening. iii) The reasons recorded are found to be incorrect. 9. The CIT(A) after considering the submissions of the assessee, as in para 5.4, held that as could be seen from the assessment record, the issue under reference i.e. deemed dividend was not a subject matter of discussion in the original assessment passed u/s 143(3). The CIT(A) further observed that regarding the reasons recorded for reopening the assessment, it revealed that the AO has considered two issues for reopening the asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ee had failed to disclose material facts necessary for assessment. He further contended that the AO had conceded that the assessee had made a full disclosure of all material facts necessary for the assessment. To this effect the learned counsel referred the findings of the AO vide page No. 2 of his order, which are as under:- On verification of the information available on record, it is observed that M/s Active Power Corporation Ltd., has gifted land valued in the books at ₹ 44.04 lakhs to Shri V. Radha Krishna on 15/12/2003. Sri V. Radha Krishna is a substantial shareholder in M/s Active Power Corporation Ltd., a company in which public are not substantially involved. By virtue of provisions of section 2(22)(e), the amount of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the decision of L. Algasundaram Chettiar Vs. ITR, 252 ITR 893. 17. We have heard the arguments of both the parties, perused the record and gone through the orders of the authorities as well as the decisions cited. We find that the assessee had addressed the letter dated 28/04/2010 to the DCIT, Central Circle-7, Hyderabad asking for the reasons recorded for the issue of notice u/s 148, and had failed to receive the same. It was only after the receipt of the order of the CIT(A) that the assessee had come to know the reasons recorded wherein vide para 5.5 of the order, the reasons recorded wee reproduced by the CIT(A). We find that the Hon ble Bombay Bench of ITAT in the case of Tata International Ltd. Vs. DCIT, Mumbai in ITA Nos. 3359 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee and the reasons recorded cannot be improved upon or amended by any correspondence, letters, etc. Though the reasons recorded were called for by the CIT(A) at the time of hearing before him and the same were extracted in the order of the CIT(A) the fact remains that before the completion of the assessment, the reasons recorded were not actually furnished to the assessee despite his letter dated 28/04/2010, therefore, following the ratio laid down by the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of GKN Drive Shafts Ltd.(supra), we are of the opinion that the reassessment order passed without supply of reasons as recorded for reopening of the assessment is invalid and cannot be sustained. Accordingly, we set aside the assessment under co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
