9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (12) TMI 435X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d on 13-12-2010 for the Asst Year 2008-09 and whereas notice u/sec. 148 of the Act dated 21-01-2014, was issued, which is beyond the expiry of four years from the end of assessment year 2008-09 and the assessee has filed the details and disclosed fully and truly all material facts relevant to the assessment year in consideration. We considering the facts and provisions of law, observe that the assessment was reopened beyond a period of four years and cannot be sustained. Accordingly, we quash the reassessment order and allow the appeal of the assessee. - ITA No.1169/Bang/2018 - - - Dated:- 12-8-2020 - Shri B.R. Baskaran, Accountant Member And Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Judicial Member For the Assessee : Shri R. Chandrashekar, Advocat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in upholding the in applying the provisions of section 194C in appellant's case by invoking the section 40(a)(ia) in respect of hire charges and no disallowance is called for.. 6. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in upholding the levy of interest levied u/s. 234B and 234C of the Act. Levy of interest is not warranted in the appellant's case. 3. The Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a real estate agent engaged in formation and sale of sites, and filed the return of income for the Asst. Year 2008-09 on 23.09.2008 with total income of ₹ 47,72,140/-. Subsequently, the case was selected for scrutiny and notice under section 143(2) of the Act w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ayments does not exceed the limit of ₹ 20,000/- under the provisions under Section 194C of the Act. But the Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the explanations of the assessee and observed that the commission charges are subject to TDS under Section 194H of the Act and the Hire charges are subject to TDS under section 194C of the Act. In both the cases, the assessee has failed to deduct TDS and disallowed the claim and assessed total income of ₹ 70,71,404/- and passed order under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act dt. 19.01.2015. Aggrieved by the order, the assessee has filed an appeal with the CIT (Appeals), whereas the CIT (A) considering the grounds of appeal, submissions on validity of reassessment under Section 147 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion on same set of facts, which cannot be sustained. The assessee in the original assessment proceedings under Section 143(3) of the Act has furnished the details and the fact of non-deduction of TDS was mentioned in the Form no. 3CD Tax Audit Report u/sec. 44AB of the Act. We on perusal of the assessment order under Section 143(3) of the Act dt. 13.12.2010 find that, the assessee has submitted the details and the Assessing Officer made ad hoc addition referred at Page 2 para 2 of the order which is read as under: 2. The AR Shri. Ashok K. was asked to produce details of major expense like Land Developments Expenses , Commission Paid , Hire Charges etc. The details were produced including bills vouchers. It is seen that for the abov ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and fair disclosure of facts and furnished the details in the original assessment proceedings and also there is no lapse on the part of assessee. Further the fact of non-deduction of TDS was placed on record in Form no. 3CD. At this stage, we consider it appropriate to refer to the provisions of Section 147 of the Act r.w. Explanation 1 which is read as under: 147. If the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for any assessment year, he may, subject to the provisions of sections 148 to 153, assess or reassess such income and also any other income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment and which comes to his notice subsequently in the course of the proceedings under this ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... due diligence have been discovered by the Assessing Officer will not necessarily amount to disclosure within the meaning of the foregoing proviso. We find that the assessee has produced bills and vouchers for expenditure, prima facie, the Assessing Officer has not verified the facts of TDS/material filed on record, therefore the mistake on the part of assessing officer in the original assessment cannot be a reason for reopening of assessment. Further the assessment is reopened beyond the time limit prescribed under Section 149(1)(a) of the Act. We find that the assessment order u/sec. 143(3) of the Act was passed on 13-12-2010 for the Asst Year 2008-09 and whereas notice u/sec. 148 of the Act dated 21-01-2014, was issued, which is beyon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
