9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (4) TMI 381X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to pass the order in this case. As regards the merits of the case addition has been made on the basis of percentage of the value of the house property. No case has been made out by the Assessing Officer that there was attempt by the assessee to reduce value of the house property income. It is not the case that the Assessing Officer has made any inquiry about the prevalent rental income or he has examined the State Municipal value. Without such examination, such a substitution of house property income upon whimsies and fancies of the Assessing Officer is not sustainable on the touchstone of Tip Top Typography [ 2014 (8) TMI 356 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] - Thus hold that addition on merits is also not sustainable. Appeal of assessee allowed. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the value of ₹ 2,16,54,500/- came to ₹ 18,40,633/- and thereafter after giving deduction he computed four months estimated income at ₹ 4,29,481/-. In response, the assessee submitted that all necessary details were shown to the Assessing Officer at the time of original assessment. The Assessing Officer rejected assessee s contention and estimated income at ₹ 4,29,481/-. 4. Against the above order assessee appealed before learned CIT(A). Learned CIT(A) summarised the facts of the case are as under :- The appellant is a co-owner of two house properties at Dakshinamurthy CHS, Juhu. Her share from the said property is 1/11th from Unit No.3 and 1/4th from Unit No.7, Both the units are let out property. The appel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... otice u/s. 148 of the Act was on account of change of opinion between the AOs, as all the details, documents, etc. were available to the AO while the original assessment u/s. 143(3) was completed on 15.10.2008, In this regard it is stated that the details, documents etc. though were available to the AO while completing assessment u/s. 143(3) on 15.10.2008 but the same per se cannot be interpreted to mean that the AO while completing the original assessment had formed an opinion that the subject income for which reassessment proceedings have been initiated, were not taxable in the hands of the appellant. Further the assessee has not been able to show that there was any specific show cause notice issued by the AO in respect of the subject inc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch circumstances is permissible only if there is failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts. Learned CIT(A) is not disputing the fact that details were not available. He has held that since there was no discussion by the Assessing Officer it cannot be said that the Assessing Officer had formed an opinion. In my considered opinion reasoning of learned CIT(A) may have some iota of substance if the reopening was done within four years. In the present case as mandated by the Act no reopening can be done unless there is failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts. Since details of the house property was duly available with the Assessing Officer when original assessmen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
