9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (10) TMI 398X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ged that assessee has not disclosed fully and truly all material facts relating to its assessment, however, it is a purely general observation without substantiating how the failure can be attributed to assessee. Only because confirmation of the sundry creditor was not available, it will not lead to believe that the income has escaped assessment. In the aforesaid view of the matter, I hold that reopening of assessment in the instant case is invalid. Even otherwise also, assessee has a strong case on merits. As could be seen, while completing the original assessment, the assessing officer had added back the outstanding sundry creditors - while deciding assessee's appeal, the Tribunal had deleted the entire addition made by the assessi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Income-Tax Act, 1961 and, therefore, the said reassessment proceeding initiated along with the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer on the foundation of such proceeding are liable to be quashed and CIT(A) erred in not holding so. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in confirming addition of Rs. 35,63,423/- made by the Assessing Officer under section 68 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 in respect of sundry creditors. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the addition of Rs. 35,63,423/- made by the Assessing Officer is beyond the scope of jurisdiction and provisions of section 147/148 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 and CIT(A) erred in not holding so. 3. Briefly, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ition made was also sustained by learned Commissioner (Appeals). 6. Before me, learned counsel appearing for the assessee submitted that the reopening of assessment was after four years from the end of the relevant assessment year. He submitted, since, the original assessment was made under Section 143(3) of the Act, the assessing officer could not have reopened the assessment without demonstrating that the escapement of income was due to the failure on the part of the assessee to furnish particulars of its income truly and correctly. 7. Drawing our attention to the reasons recorded, learned counsel for the assessee submitted, after completion of the original assessment, no new tangible material has come to the possession of the asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... m the end of the relevant assessment year. In fact, the assessing officer has reopened assessment in March, 2016 just prior to expiry of six years from the end of the relevant assessment year. Thus, the conditions of proviso to section 147 would apply. In other words, the assessing officer has to demonstrate that the escapement of income was due to failure on the part of the assessee to furnish all material facts relating to its assessment truly and correctly. On perusal of reasons recorded for reopening of assessment, it is observed that the assessing officer had no fresh tangible material in his possession while reopening the assessment under Section 147 of the Act. In the reasons recorded, the assessing officer has very clearly stated th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
