9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 738X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g fishing enquiries. Hence there is merit in the contentions of the Ld A.R that the information received by the AO merely gave reason to suspect that there was escapement of income. The reopening of assessment on the basis of suspicion is not valid as held by Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Bakulbhai Ramanlal Patel Vs. ITO (2011 (3) TMI 1576 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT). Admittedly, Assessing Officer did not make any additions in respect of above said three issues meaning thereby, the Assessing Officer was satisfied during the course of reassessment proceedings that the above said three transactions does not warrant any additions. Since no addition was made in respect of issues from which the Assessing Officer drew belief that there w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessee has also entered into transactions for purchase of immovable property valued at ₹ 47,40,000/- and ₹ 32,60,000/- on 23.05.2006 as per information received through AIR from the Jt. Sub-Registration Office, MSD, Andheri, Mumbai. Thus, prima-facie considering the quantum involved in the various information and the returned income of only ₹ 3.50,256/-, I am therefore satisfied that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the Income Tax Act,I961. Notice u/s 148 is therefore being issued. As more than 4 years have elapsed after the end of assessment year, approval of Addl.CIT, needs to be taken as per the provisions of section 151 of the I.T. Act, 1961. Hence, it is reque ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Assessing Officer has reopened the assessment to examine transactions made with Standard Chartered Bank, investments made in RBI Bonds and also to examine purchase of immovable properties on 23.6.2006. The Learned AR submitted that the assessee did not have any bank account with Standard Chartered Bank and also she did not purchase any property on 23.6.2006. The RBI bonds have also been purchased through bank accounts only. Consequently, the Assessing Officer did not make any addition in respect of above cited three transactions. He submitted that Hon'ble Bombay High Court, in the case of CIT Vs. Jet Airways (I) Ltd. 331 ITR 236, has held that if after issuing a notice under section 148, the Assessing Officer accepted the contention of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in law and, in any case, additions made by the Assessing Officer in the impugned order are beyond his jurisdiction as per the decision rendered by the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Jet Airways Ltd (supra). 7. On the contrary, the learned DR strongly supported the order passed by the learned CIT(A) on this issue. 8. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record. A Careful perusal of the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer would show that the Assessing Officer has reopened the assessment in respect of following three transactions: (i) Transaction amounting to ₹ 12,09,679/- with Standard Chartered Bank. (ii) Payment of ₹ 15,95,000/- for purchase of bonds issued by RBI. (iii) Purchase of im ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the AO merely gave reason to suspect that there was escapement of income. The reopening of assessment on the basis of suspicion is not valid as held by Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Bakulbhai Ramanlal Patel Vs. ITO (56 DTR 212). Accordingly the re-opening of assessment is not valid for this reason. 11. The learned CIT(A) has taken the view that there was error in the report given by Joint Sub-Registrar and same has resulted in mistake in recording the reasons by the Assessing Officer. It has been held by Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Hindustan Lever Ltd. (supra) that reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer cannot be supplemented or amended subsequently. Hence, we are unable to agree with the view so exp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
