9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2021 (12) TMI 997X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is nothing in the reasons to indicate that there has been failure on the part of petitioner to truly and fully disclose any material fact. No reply has been filed though time to file reply was granted on 18th December 2019. 3. In the reasons, it is stated that office of respondent no.1 received beneficiaries information in the case of one M/s. Divine Multimedia (India) Ltd., a Penny Stock Company from DDIT (Inv) Unit 7 (3), Mumbai through email dated 28th March 2019. On persual of the same, it is seen that the assessee has indulged in creating fictitious Long Term Capital Gain/Loss/Short Term Capital Gain on purchase and sale of penny stocks during the year and the company on which petitioner has illegitimate activity of booking of bogus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pening does not specifically state that there was any failure on the part of petitioner to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for its assessment for the relevant assessment year, it will not be fatal to the assumption of jurisdiction under Sections 147 and 148 of the Act. We would certainly agree with Mr. Suresh Kumar but as held in Crompton Greaves Ltd. (Supra), this is subject to the rider that there must be cogent and clear indication in the reasons supplied, that in fact there was failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all the material facts necessary for its assessment. If the factum of failure to disclose can be culled down from the reasons in support of the notice seeking to reopen assessme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... judicial principle that the true test of income chargeable to tax escaping assessment is whether there exists fresh "tangible material" on the basis of which an appropriate conclusion can be reached. In the absence of such fresh material, the reassessment proceedings would be invalid. This principle has been upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the jurisdictional High Court in various rulings. This Court has held that reassessment based on a reconsideration of material already available on record at the time of the original assessment proceedings tantamounts to a change of opinion and would be invalid. Further, since the relevant facts, which were already on record at the time of the original assessment proceedings, also form the basis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
