9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (6) TMI 497X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... demonstrate that in course of original assessment proceedings, not only the assessing officer has made thorough enquiry with regard to the disputed issue on which the assessment has been reopened, but the assessee has also furnished all relevant and necessary materials to justify the income offered by it. That being the case, we are of the considered opinion that the reopening of assessment in the present case is invalid and void ab-initio. - Decided in favour of assessee. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and correctly, reopening of assessment under section 147 of the Act after expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year cannot be made. He submitted, in course of original assessment proceedings the assessing officer, from time to time, has conducted enquiries and called upon the assessee to explain various issues relating to income earned during the year with supporting evidence. Drawing our attention to the notice dated 24-06-2011 issued under section 142(1) of the Act, a copy of which is at page 1 of the paper book, along with its annexure, the learned counsel submitted, the assessing officer had called upon the assessee to furnish the balance-sheet as on 31-03-2009, both, relating to the trading activity as well as the personal balance-sheet and capital account. He submitted, in response to the query raised, assessee furnished the required details before the assessing officer. Further, he submitted, the assessing officer again issued a notice under section 142(1) of the Act on 08-08-2011 calling upon the assessee to furnish item-wise opening and closing stock, quantities, rate and amount, method of valuation of closing stock relating to investment in share ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the assessing officer was not with independent application of mind, but on borrowed satisfaction. Thus, he submitted, the reopening of assessment under section 147 of the Act is invalid. In support of his contentions, he relied upon the following decisions:- 1. Indian Bank vs DCIT 63 taxmann.com 145 (Mad) 2. DCIT vs Bank of Baroda ITA No.5604 & 5605/Mum/2016 5. As regards merits of the issue, the learned counsel submitted, during the year, the assessee had purchased 350 units of 11.2% Power Finance Corporation Bond. The issue date and maturity date of these bonds were on 29-11-2008 and 28-11-2018 respectively. He submitted, 200 units were purchased on 23-12-2008, 50 units on 30-12-2008 and 100 units on 05-01-2009. He submitted, assessee purchased these bonds from HDFC trustee/Kotak MF cum interest basis, i.e. cost (+) interest upto the date of purchase. Interest on these bonds is paid on 28th day of November of each year. He submitted, the person, who holds the bond on the due date is entitled to interest for the full year. In case the bonds are purchased after the interest payment date, the purchaser, apart from the cost of bond also has to pay for the accrued interest i.e. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (1) of the Act and its annexure, the assessing officer had specifically called for the details of opening/closing stock item wise, quantities, rate and amount, method of valuation of closing stock, details of interest receivables of ₹ 1,33,76,712/-, details of interest, interest on trading stock, profit on sale of long-term investment, etc. 8. In response to the queries raised by the assessing officer, as aforesaid, the assessee had furnished its reply dated 11-08-2011 explaining all the details with supporting documentary evidences. Thus, it is evident, the assessing officer was conscious of the fact that as against the accrued interest shown of ₹ 1,33,76,712/- assessee had offered the amount of ₹ 1,04,08,562/-. Therefore, it becomes amply clear, being satisfied with the documentary evidences furnished by the assessee as well as the explanation furnished, the assessing officer concluded that the assessee has correctly offered all its interest income and accordingly completed the assessment under section 143(3) of the Act. 9. Undisputedly, the assessing officer has reopened the assessment after expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment, the assessing officer had merely revisited the material already considered during the original assessment proceedings and has formed an opinion regarding escapement of income. These facts clearly demonstrate that not only the assessing officer has no tangible material in his possession to, prima facie, come to a conclusion that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment but has reopened the assessment on a mere change of opinion on an issue which stood concluded in the original assessment proceedings. Thus, in the garb of reopening of assessment the assessing officer, in reality, intended to review his earlier decision. This, in our considered opinion, is impermissible. That being the case, the reopening of assessment under section 147 of the Act is invalid for this reason also. 12. We may further add, in course of hearing it has been brought to our notice by learned counsel for the assessee that on the basis of an audit objection, the assessing officer, after completion of assessment under section 143(3) of the Act had issued a notice on 27-05-2013 specifically calling upon the assessee to explain as to why against the interest receivable shown at ₹ 1,33,76,712/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
