9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 1151X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... proceedings, the A.O. has made detailed scrutiny of the tax audit report filed by the assessee by relying upon the bills and vouchers brought on record by the assessee to carry out repair and maintenance and thereafter the A.O. had completed the assessment u/s 143(3). Even otherwise in all assessment years 2007-08, 2009- 10, 2010-11, 2011-12 identical expenses claimed by the assessee have been allowed by the revenue while passing order u/s 143(3) as is apparent from the return of income for the aforesaid assessment years available. So the contentions raised by Ld. Sr. DR for the revenue are not tenable nor the case law relied upon by him is applicable to the facts and circumstances of the case in the face of proviso to section 147 of the A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the expenditure of ₹ 1,00,62,632/- debited under the head Repair and Maintenance being capital in nature observed that the same should have been disallowed. A.O. ultimately proceeded to conclude that an income of ₹ 57,84,820/- has escaped assessment and reopened the assessment u/s 147 of the Act. Assessee raised comprehensive objection to the show cause notice issued u/s 148 of the Act. A.O. proceeded to hold that amended provision u/s 147/148 are wide enough and can be exercised even when the assessee had declared fully and truly all material facts and after relying upon decision cited as Rakesh Aggarwal vs. ACIT (1996) 87 Taxmann 306/225 ITR, 496 (Delhi) treated an amount of ₹ 73,49,965/- out of total expenditure of & ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ome has escaped tax :- The assessee filed return of income Tax for A.Y. 2005-06 on 25.10.2005 declaring income of ₹ 57,84,820/- which proceed u/s 143(1).Subsequently, the case was picked up for scrutiny and notice u/s 142(2) of the I.T. Act was issued on 27.10.2006. The assessment u/s 143(3) of the I.T. Act was made on 27.09.2007 at the income of ₹ 57,84,820/-. The assessee is engaged in the business of shuttering. The assessee supplies shuttering on hire to contractor s builders etc. In this case it is noted that the expenditure of ₹ 1,00,62,632/- debited under the head repair and maintenance as of capital nature in the 3CD report which should have been disallowed has been allowed. This excessive allowance of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ry for assessment, the A.O. was empowered to reopen the assessment within a period of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, but in the instant case notice u/s 148 of the Act for reopening of assessment was issued on 29.3.2012, copy of which is available at page 32 of the paper book. So it is amply clear that the assessment reopened by the A.O. u/s 147/148 after a period of four years from the end of relevant assessment year, particularly when there was no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts for assessment is not sustainable in the eyes of law. 10. Even otherwise perusal of the reasons recorded for reopening itself shows that assessment has been reopened just because of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... all material facts necessary for assessment. Proviso to section 147 itself is categorical enough to bar the A.O. from initiating reopening. 13. In the instant case at the time of original assessment proceedings, the A.O. has made detailed scrutiny of the tax audit report filed by the assessee by relying upon the bills and vouchers brought on record by the assessee to carry out repair and maintenance and thereafter the A.O. had completed the assessment u/s 143(3). Even otherwise in all assessment years 2007-08, 2009- 10, 2010-11, 2011-12 identical expenses claimed by the assessee have been allowed by the revenue while passing order u/s 143(3) as is apparent from the return of income for the aforesaid assessment years available at page 161 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
