9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (1) TMI 418X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... terfere with the impugned judgment passed by the Tribunal. According to us, no substantial question of law arises, in the present appeal, for our consideration. - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER AND HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU Appellant Through: Mr Sanjay Kumar, Sr. Standing Counsel. Respondent Through: Mr S. Krishnan and Mr Amandeep Mehta, Advs. [Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)] RAJIV SHAKDHER, J. (ORAL): 1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 29.06.2018 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [in short Tribunal ] concerning Assessment Year (AY) 2009-2010. 2. The principal allegation levelled against the respondent/assessee, based on which the reasse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The record shows, that after scrutiny was carried out, an assessment order was passed on 24.12.2011 under Section 143(3) of the Act. 8. Interestingly, during the course of the scrutiny, the assessing officer had sought information with regard to the transactions entered into by the respondent/assessee with the aforementioned share broking entity i.e., AATIPL. 8.1 The Tribunal also records, that the respondent/assessee via letter dated 07.12.2011 i.e., prior to assessment order being passed had submitted a copy of the Client Ledger which adverted to details of settlement arrived between him and AATIPL. This document, admittedly, disclosed that the settlement resulted in a loss amounting to Rs.1,82,10,431.54. 9. The record shows, tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ccording to Mr Sanjay Kumar, who appears on behalf of the appellant/revenue, the first two circumstances set out hereinabove, did not arise in this case. 12. The argument advanced by Mr Kumar is, that the instant case falls within the third circumstance referred to hereinabove i.e., failure on the part of the assessee to disclose, fully or truly, all material facts. 13. Mr Kumar has submitted, that the information received by the appellant/revenue through the respondent s/assessee s broker had not been disclosed, and therefore, the reopening of concluded assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act was viable in law. 14. Mr S. Krishnan, who appears on behalf of the respondent/assessee, on the other hand, has submitted that the trigge ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the concluded assessment framed under Section 143(3) of the Act, beyond four years commencing from the end of the relevant AY i.e., AY 2009-2010 could only have been founded on the failure on the part of the respondent/assessee to fully and truly disclose all material facts. Concededly, during the framing of the earlier assessment order, the assessing officer had sought information with regard to the respondent/assessee s share broker, which was furnished by the respondent assessee via communication dated 07.12.2011. (ii) Neither in the extract of reasons to believe which have been placed before us by the appellant/revenue, nor in the reassessment order dated 13.12.2016 passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Act, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
