9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (4) TMI 1177X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t and Loss account, and this was an aspect which the AO seems to have noticed after the scrutiny assessment was framed. It is well-established that reassessment proceedings can be based on new material, and not material information which is already on record. The respondent/assessee in this case had disclosed primary facts. AO, decidedly, committed an error in appreciating the information that was already available on record. To our minds, the power available to the AO under Section 147 of the Act does not go so far as to correct errors in appreciating the primary facts, which are disclosed by the respondent/assessee. Insofar as Appellant submission is concerned, that the respondent/assessee had agreed to the addition with regard t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... suffice for the disposal of the appeal. 5. The record shows that qua the AY 2005-06, the respondent/assessee had filed return on 28.10.2005. In the return filed, the respondent/assessee had declared a loss of Rs. 41,72,99,430/-. 6. The respondent/assessee was subjected to scrutiny and accordingly, an order under Section 143(3) of the Act was framed on 15.12.2008. 6.1 The assessed income of the petitioner was pegged at Rs. 40,29,18,340/-. 7. The record shows that on 27.03.2012, a notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued to the petitioner, requiring it to file a return for the aforementioned AY. 7.1 In response thereto, on 03.04.2012, respondent/assessee intimated the AO that the return already filed under Section 139(1) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pees at the rates of exchange prevailing on the balance sheet date. As these losses are not based on actual remittance but merely restatement of assets and liabilities were required to be disallowed and added back to the income of the assessee. Since, the assessee failed to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for his assessment for the AY 2005-06. Therefore, an income of Rs. 5,26,83,280/- chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for the A.Y. 2005-06. In view of the above, I have reasons to believe that an income of Rs. 5,26,83,2801/- has escaped assessment for the A.Y. 2005-06. 9. The respondent/assessee, in response to the reasons furnished, filed its objections on 14.01.2013. These objections were disposed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot dispute the fact that the respondent/assessee had indicated that the loss on sale of fixed assets could be added to the returned income. However, Mr Chopra says that this by itself could not confer jurisdiction on the AO, as in the reasons furnished to the respondent/assessee, there is no reference to any audit objection. 12.1 In other words, it was Mr Chopra s contention that reassessment proceedings were triggered based on the information/material already available on record to the AO. 13. Although, for the sake of brevity, we are not once again setting forth the reasons furnished to the petitioner by the AO, as they are already extracted in paragraph 8 above, they are an important parameter for testing the tenability of the impu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
