9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (8) TMI 19X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion of the AO warranting reopening of the assessee s case. AO did not rebut the appellant s contention that nothing over and above the amount recorded in the registered sale deeds was received by bringing necessary details. The unsubstantiated material found in the diary in possession of Shri Madan Mohan Gupta cannot be considered in the hands of the assessee as a conclusive evidence so as to reopen the assessment and make additions towards long term capital gain in sale of the plot of land. Undisputedly, no other material suggesting receipt of higher amounts was recovered during the search. It is trite law that burden is on the revenue to prove that the price had been under stated and no addition is possible without any inquiry. In this case, there is no cogent material to support the reopening of the assessment within the meaning of section 147 and that the appellant has actually received higher amount than that recorded in the registered sale deed and the AO did not conduct any inquiry to bring some material to corroborate the notings found in the diary allegedly contained dealings in respect of certain properties sold by the assessee, except relying on the statement of Sh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessment. 7. The assessee craves your indulgence to add amend or alter all or any grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing. ITA NO.123/JP/2021 : 1. Under the facts and circumstances of the case the learned CIT (A) has erred confirming the order passed by learned AO u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 which is void ab-initio deserves to be quashed. 2. Under the facts and circumstances of the case the learned CIT (A) has erred confirming the addition of Rs. 13,58,326/- account of alleged undisclosed long term capital gain. 3. Under the facts and circumstances of the case the learned CIT (A) has erred confirming the action of AO for not allowing the cost of improvement of Rs. 2,78,520/- incurred by the assessee for constructing the boundary wall on the plot. 4. Under the facts and circumstances of the case the learned CIT (A) has erred in adopting the sale consideration of Rs. 15,08,000/- as against actual sale consideration of Rs. 5,43,465/- shown by the assessee and taken by the sub-registrar u/s 50C of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which has been wrongly made by the AO. 5. Under the facts and circumstances of the case the learned CIT (A) has erred in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... LTCG Rs. 1,24,955/- However, it appears that due to inadvertence the return filed by the assessee escaped the notice of the Assessing Officer as he has completed the assessment under section 147 on 25.12.2017 without taking into consideration the return filed by the assessee. Assessment under section 147 of the IT Act was completed on a total income of Rs. 12,49,280/- by increasing the sale consideration received on sale of land at Rs. 12,74,000/- on the basis of alleged noting in some diary found and seized during the course of search from the residence of Shri Madan Mohan Gupta instead of Rs. 5,43,465/- declared by the assessee as per registered sale deed dated 23.05.2009. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, assessee preferred appeal before the ld. CIT (A), who has confirmed the additions made by the AO. Now the assessee has come in appeal before the Tribunal. In Ground no. 1 the assessee has challenged confirming the order of the AO and validity of reopening of the case of the assessee under section 147 read with section 148 of the IT Act. 2. Before us, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has reiterated the submis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cer has further wrongly held that the entire sale consideration of Rs. 15,08,000/- is escaped income. He has not considered that the index cost of the plot required to be reduced from the sale consideration. It is submitted that the above facts observed by the Learned Assessing Officer are not in order. There was no evidence of assessee selling the plot for a sum of Rs. 15,08,000/-. There is no reference of any document in this regard. The Learned Assessing Officer has not given any basis to reach to the conclusion that there was escapement of income of Rs. 15,08,000/-. The Learned Assessing Officer did not cause any enquiry either to verify the actual sale price or the purchase price. The Learned Assessing Officer has simply jumped to the conclusion that entire sale proceeds was escaped income whereas on the other hand he also observed that income on sale of the plot was not ascertainable. Thus the reasons recorded by the Learned Assessing Officer are contradictory. On the one hand it is stated that income on sale of land is not ascertainable and on the other hand entire sale proceeds is considered as income, The Learned Assessing Officer has issued notice u/s 148 as a thumb ru ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ble with the AO In the instant case, the first sentence of the reasons recorded by the AO states that information has been received from Director of IT (Inv.) that assessee has introduced unaccounted money amounting to Rs. 5 lacs during the relevant year as per the details given in the Annexure Said Annexure mentions a cheque received by assessee from SS Ltd. and the account number Last sentence states that as per the information the amount received was an accommodation entry Aforesaid information and the reasons are extremely scanty and vague and do not satisfy the requirements of s. 147 There is no reference to any document or statement, except the Annexure Said Annexure cannot be regarded as a material or evidence that prima facie shows or establishes escapement of income Further, it is apparent that the AO did not apply his own mind to the information and examine the basis of the information He accepted the information in a mechanical manner CIT also acted on the same basis by mechanically giving his approval Company SS Ltd. had applied for and was allotted shares in the assessee company on payment of Rs. 5 lacs by cheque SS Ltd. is an incorporated company and it has been allo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessment-Proceedings under s. 147/148 rightly quashed by Tribunal-No substantial question of law arises for consideration. (vii) SARTHAK SECURITIES CO. (P) LTD. vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (2010) 329 ITR 110 HIGH COURT OF DELHI Where the identity of the companies who had invested in the shares of petitioner-company was not disputed and neither the reasons in the initial notice nor the communication providing reasons remotely indicated independent application of mind by AO, reassessment proceedings were unwarranted and notice issued under s. 148 was liable to be quashed. The ld. A/R, therefore, requested that in view of totality of facts of the case and position of law, there is prima facie no material before the Assessing Officer to form his belief pursuant to which reasons could be recorded that income of assessee has been escaped to assessment and therefore, the proceedings initiated are bad in law and deserves to be quashed. In view of the above, reopening done by the ld. AO is illegal and deserves to be quashed. 3. On the contrary, the ld. CIT D/R has vehemently supported the order of the Assessing Officer. 4. We have considered the rival submissions as well ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Madan Mohan Gupta allegedly contained dealings in respect of certain properties sold by the assessee. The details recorded in the seized diary found from the possession of Shri Madan Mohan Gupta allegedly revealed the sale value of the plot at Rs. 12,74,000/-. The statement of Shri Madan Mohan Gupta was recorded by Investigation Wing in which he has explained the transactions of land sold by the assessee and purchased by Shri Rajendra Kumar Jain. The department also recorded the statements of Shri Rajendra Kumar Jain who has admitted the purchase of the plot as it was through registered sale deed. The assessee has denied having sold the plot at Rs. 12,74,000/- other than amount mentioned in the registered sale deed. The Assessing Officer after reopening the case of the assessee has assessed the income of the assessee at Rs. 12,49,285/- by making an addition of Rs. 11,28,325/- on account of difference of LTCG on sale of the plot. Therefore, in the search and seizure proceedings and in the subsequent investigation what was detected by the Department is the seized material containing the transaction of land sold by the assessee and purchased by Shri Rajendra Kumar Jain. The AO has ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... paragraphs No. 6 and 7, which is reproduced as under: 6. We have considered the rival submissions as well as relevant material on record. The matter revolves around the transaction of purchase and sale of land situated at Village Chainpura, Tehsil Sanganer (behind of Entertainment Paradise) Jaipur. The said land was purchased by M/s Shri Kalyan Buildmart Pvt. Ltd. on 24.08.2006. Thereafter the assessee purchased 8,000 shares M/s Shri Kalyan Buildmart Pvt. Ltd. from Shri Madan Mohan Gupta and his wife Smt. Shashi Kala Gupta. There is no dispute that this transfer of purchase of shares of M/s Shri Kalyan Buildmart Pvt. Ltd. was dully reflected in the books of accounts as on 31.03.2008 and also brought before the Assessing Officer in the course of initiation assessment completed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153A on 31.03.2013. Thereafter the AO proposed to reopen the assessment to assess the consideration paid by the assessee for alleged purchase of land by issuing notice u/s 148 on 25.03.2014. The AO recorded the reasons for reopening of the assessment as reproduce at page 4 of the assessment order are as under:- During the course search and seizure operation in the case of Rajendra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .r.t. a land transactions at Village chainpura behind entertainment Paradise, Jaipur has been recorded which was purchase by Shri Rajendra Kumar Jain resident of D-25, Lal Bahadur nagar, Jaipur, through him i.e. Shri Madan Mohan Gupta. The deal was finalized at Rs. 12,43,27,000/- out of which discount of Rs. 1% was allowed for registration of land. Therefore, Rs. 13,30,84,000/- were net payable to the seller and the details of the same have been recorded on page No. 15-18 of Exhibit-1 of Annexure-A, found and seized from his residence. Later on this land was sold to Shri K.G. Kothari. Shri Madan Mohan Gupta further submitted that this land was purchased in the name of M/s Kalyan Buildmart Pvt. Ltd. in which he was a director along with hiswife Smt. ShashiKala Gupta. This land was purchased during the year 2006-07 and sold to K G. Kothari, Prithviraj Road, C-Scheme, Jaipur and Shir vimal Chand Surana in the month of March, 2007 and the details of the same have been recorded on page Nos. 27 28 of Exhibit of Annexure-A. During the course of statement, Shri Madan Mohan Gupta admitted that the amounts mentioned against dates have been recorded in coded form such as Rs. 1.00 crore have ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uch other person, the reference to the date of initiation of the search under section 132 or making of requisition under section 132A in the second proviso to 84 [sub-section (1) of] section 153A shall be construed as reference to the date of receiving the books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned by the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction over such other person :] 8 5 [ Provided further that the Central Government may by rules 86 made by it and published in the Official Gazette, specify the class or classes of cases in respect of such other person, in which the Assessing Officer shall not be required to issue notice for assessing or reassessing the total income for six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which search is conducted or requisition is made 86a [and for the relevant assessment year or years as referred to in sub-section (1) of section 153A] except in cases where any assessment or reassessment has abated.] 8 7 [(2) Where books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned as referred to in sub-section (1) has or have been received by the Assessing Officer having j ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the basis of seized material has held in paras 7.2 and 8 as under:- 7.2. The undisputed facts are that a search was conducted under s. 132 of the Act in the case of M/s. Today Homes Infrastructure (P.) Ltd. on 28th March, 2006, during the course of which certain incriminating documents were allegedly seized. It is also a matter of record that the Dy. CIT, Central Circle-22, New Delhi intimated the AO of the assessee about seizure of certain documents pertaining to the assessee during search and enclosed copy of those documents requesting him to take appropriate action under s. 153C/148 of the Act. It is after that that during the course of appellate proceedings before the CIT(A) the assessee took an additional ground of appeal to the effect that the reassessment proceedings initiated by the AO under s. 148 are illegal and void ab initio. In the instant case, the learned CIT(A) has correctly observed that the AO should have issued notice under s. 153C of the Act and should have framed the assessment under s. 153C r/w s. 153A of the Act. Sec. 153C of the Act reads as under : 153C. Notwithstanding anything contained in s. 139, s. 147, s. 148, s. 149, s. 151 and s. 153, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the course of search, it was found at premises of M/s. Today Homes Infrastructure (P.) Ltd. pertaining to M/s. P.R. Infrastructure Ltd. and not the assessee. In this regard, we may point out that the contention raised by the learned Departmental Representative is factually incorrect and contrary to the available records of seized documents specifically mentioned in the assessment order dt. 30th Dec, 2008. In view of the above factual discussion, we do not find any merit and substance in the contention of the learned Departmental Representative. Therefore, we uphold the order of the CIT(A) and dismiss the ground Nos. 1 to 4 of the appeal. A similar view was taken by the Visakhapatnam Bench of this Tribunal in case of G. Koteswara Rao vs. DCIT (supra) in para 11 to 17 as under:- 11. A careful study of section 153A to 153C and also the circular issued by the CBDT explaining the procedure of assessment in search cases, it shows that these are separate provisions independent of other provisions relating to reassessment, because of the non abstante clause begins with the said sections. The language used in these sections, i.e. 'notwithstanding anything contained' in s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s are cleared by using the non abstante clause in the said section. In other words, under the new provisions of section 153A, the AO is not required to satisfy these conditions before issue of notice. The only requirement is that there should be a search action u/s 132 or books of account, other documents or any other asset are requisitioned under section 132A. Therefore, we are of the opinion that though, the Assessing Officer from both sections empowered to tax the income escaped from tax, both are works in a different situations, i.e. section 147 comes in to operation where there is an escapement of income chargeable to tax and section 153A comes in to operation where there is search u/s 132. 13. Under the provisions of section 153A, the Assessing Officer is bound to issue notice to the assessee to furnish the returns of income for each assessment years falling within the six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year in which search or requisition is made. Another significant feature of this section is that the Assessing Officer is empowered to assess or reassess the total income of the aforesaid period which includes disclosed and undisclosed income. There ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sue notice u/s 148 reopen the assessment of those six assessment year which falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of section 153A. Though, both provisions of the Act empowers the Assessing Officer to assess or reassess the income escaped from assessment, both sections are dealing with different situations. Section 147 comes into operation when, the Assessing Officer believes that there is an escapement of income chargeable to tax, either from the return already filed or through some external material evidence came to his knowledge, which shows the escapement of income. Whereas, section 153A comes into operation when there is search u/s 132 or books of accounts, or any other asset or other documents requisitioned u/s 132A. If Assessing Officer justified in proceeding with section 147 to reopen the assessment, then there would be no relevance to section 153A, which was inserted in to the Act to deal exclusively with search cases. The legislators in their wisdom clearly spelt out the provisions of law applicable to search cases by using the word shall to begin with section 153A, made it mandatory that the Assessing Officer bound to issue notice u/s 153A or 153C, thereafter proceed t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of original assessment and found in the course of search in our humble opinion such books of account or other documents have to be taken into account while making assessment or reassessment of total income under the aforesaid provision. Similar position will obtain in a case where undisclosed income or undisclosed property has been found as a consequence of search. In other words, harmonious interpretation will produce the following results :- (a) In so far as pending assessments are concerned, the jurisdiction to make original assessment and assessment u/s 153A merge into one and only one assessment for each assessment year shall be made separately on the basis of the findings of the search and any other material existing or brought on the record of the A.O. (b) in respect of non-abated assessments, the assessment will be made on the basis of books of account or other documents not produced in the course of original assessment but found in the course of search, and undisclosed income or undisclosed property discovered in the course of search. 58. Thus, question No. 1 before us is answered a) as under (a) In assessments that are abated, the A.O. retains the o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or the requisition was made and ending with the date of search/requisition. Under Section 153A and the new scheme provided for, the AO is required to exercise the normal assessment powers in respect of the previous year in which the search took place. 19. Under the provisions of Section 153A, as we have already noticed, the Assessing Officer is bound to issue notice to the assessee to furnish returns for each assessment year falling within the six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which the search or requisition was made. Another significant feature of this Section is that the Assessing Officer is empowered to assess or reassess the total income' of the aforesaid years. This is a significant departure from the earlier block assessment scheme in which the block assessment roped in only the undisclosed income and the regular assessment proceedings were preserved, resulting in multiple assessments. Under Section 153A, however, the Assessing Officer has been given the power to assess or reassess the total income of the six assessment years in question in separate assessment orders. This means that there can be only on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee in whose case a search or requisition has been initiated. Obviously there cannot be several orders for the same assessment year determining the total income of the assessee. In order to ensure this state of affairs namely, that in respect of the six assessment years preceding the assessment year relevant to the year in which the search took place there is only one determination of the total income, it has been provided in the second proviso of sub Section (1) of Section 153A that any proceedings for assessment or reassessment of the assessee which are pending on the date of initiation of the search or making requisition shall abate . Once those proceedings abate, the decks are cleared, for the Assessing Officer to pass assessment orders for each of those six years determining the total income of the assessee which would include both the income declared in the returns, if any, furnished by the assessee as well as the undisclosed income, if any, unearthed during the search or requisition. The position thus emerging is that where assessment or reassessment proceedings are pending completion when the search is initiated or requisition is made, they will abate making way f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... impugned assessment completed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act is a nullity and as such the assessment order dtd. 31-10-2006 passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act is illegal, arbitrary, wholly without jurisdiction and, hence, the same is quashed. 17. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also applying the ratios of the above mentioned decisions, we are of the considered opinion that the Assessing Officer, has no jurisdiction to issue notice u/s 148 of the Act to reopen the assessments in respect of those six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year in which search is conducted or requisition is made. The period under consideration falls within the exclusive domain of section 153A. In the instant case, since the assessment is made consequent to search in another case, the Assessing Officer is bound to issue notice u/s 153C and thereafter proceed to assess or reassess total income under section 153A of the Act. The Assessing Officer, instead of complying with the provisions of section 153C, proceeded with the reassessment under section 147/148 which is not applicable to search cases. Therefore, the impugned assessment order passed u/s 143( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ab initio. The reassessment in question is accordingly quashed. The ground No.1 is accordingly allowed. Therefore, in conjoint reading of provisions of section 153A, 153C and 147/148 of the Act as well as a consistent view taken by this Tribunal in a series of decision cited (supra) we hold that the assessment or reassessment of income of the person other than search persons based on seized material can be only be made u/s 153C r.w.s. 153A and the provisions of section 147/148 of the Act are not applicable in such cases. No contrary decision has been brought to our notice. Accordingly, we hold that initiation of proceedings u/s 147/148 by the AO to reassess the income is illegal being without jurisdiction and consequently the reassessment order passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) is also illegal and void abinitio and is liable to be quashed. 7. As regards the second objection of the assessee against the reopening of the assessment u/s 148 we find that undisputedly the notice u/s 148 issued on 25.03.2014 is after the expiry of 4 years from the end of the assessment year under consideration. The initial assessment was framed by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153A and theref ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the facts and record that it was a transaction of purchase of shares of M/s Kalyan Buildmart Pvt. Ltd. and not purchase of land owned by the said company. Even if the purchase consideration of share is under stated the reasons for reopening do not state so and therefore, the reopening on the basis of non existing transaction is not permitted. Once, the transaction of purchase of shares was revealed during the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153A and the same was considered and accepted by the AO then the AO is not permitted to reopen the assessment to review its order as it would amount to change of opinion. The Hon ble Madras High court in case of CIT vs. Remedies Ltd. (Supra) has held in paras 10 to 12 as under:- 10. We find from the order of the Tribunal and also on the facts as has been culled out from the assessment order in question that there is no element of failure to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment. Therefore, there was no justification for the department for invocation of proceeding under Section 147 r/w 148 of the Income Tax Act. 11. Our stand is further fortified by the decision of this Court in TCA No.217/2015 dated 2.6. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the substitution of Section 147 of the Income Tax Act. The Supreme Court also held that the Assessing Officer has power to reopen the assessment, provided there is tangible material to come to a conclusion that there was an escapement of income from assessment. For better appreciation, the relevant portion of the said decision reads as follows: 6. On going through the changes, quoted above, made to section 147 of the Act, we find that, prior to the Direct Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1987, reopening could be done under the above two conditions and fulfilment of the said conditions alone conferred jurisdiction on the Assessing Officer to make a back assessment, but in section 147 of the Act (with effect from 1st April, 1989), they are given a go-by and only one condition has remained, viz., that where the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that income has escaped assessment, confers jurisdiction to reopen the assessment. Therefore, post-1st April, 1989, power to reopen is much wider. However, one needs to give a schematic interpretation to the words reason to believe failing which, we are afraid, section 147 would give arbitrary powers to the Assessing Officer to reopen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on'. Other provisions of the new section 147, however, remain the same. (emphasis supplied) 18. Similar view has been taken by this Court in the decision reported in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Co. Ltd. [2009] 309 ITR 110 , wherein it was held as follows: In those circumstances, it could not be regarded that the assessee had failed to disclose fully and truly all material facts relevant for the assessment. As the facts revealed that the Assessing Officer who made the original assessment order has called for all the details regarding the case where 100 per cent. depreciation were claimed and the assessee had furnished the invoices for purchase of assets on which 100 per cent. depreciation were claimed, there was no failure on the part of the assessee and if at all there was any failure, according to the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), it was on the part of the Assessing Officer, who made the original assessment without going behind the nature of the transactions accepting the details furnished by the assessee. The Tribunal also extracted that portion of the order and found on the fact that there was no fault on the part of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to truly and fully disclose the material facts necessary for the assessment. Whenever a notice is issued by the Assessing Officer beyond a period of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, such notice being issued without recording the reasons for his belief that income escaped assessment, it cannot be presumed in law that there is also a failure on the part of the assessee to file the returns referred to in the proviso or a failure to fully and truly disclose the material facts. The reasons referred to in the main paragraph of section 147 would, in cases where the proviso is attracted, include reasons referred to in the proviso and it is necessary for the Assessing Officer to record that any one or all the circumstances referred to in the proviso existed before the issue of notice under section 147.... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The duty of an assessee is limited to fully and truly disclosing all the material facts. The assessee is not required thereafter to prepare a draft assessment order. If the details placed by the assessee before the Assessing Officer were in conformity with the requirements of all applicable laws and known accounting ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ilure on the part of the assessee to make a proper return. In the present case, no such case is made out on the record. 8. In the circumstances, we allow this petition in terms of prayer (a) and quash and set aside the notice dated 27th March 2006 directing reopening of the assessment for the year 1999-2000. 21. The above-said view of the Bombay High Court was affirmed by the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.5960 of 2012.' 12. In the light of the above, we hold that when the Assessing Officer had failed to record anywhere his satisfaction or belief that the income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment on account of the failure of the assessee to disclose truly and fully all material facts necessary for assessment. On the contrary, it was the Assessing Officer, who failed to consider the materials placed before him at the time of regular assessment for which the assessee cannot be found fault with. Therefore, the notice issued under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act beyond the period of four years was wholly without jurisdiction and cannot be sustained. Accordingly, for the reasons stated above, the substantial question of law is answered in favour of the respo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t circumstance out of consideration. We have come to the conclusion that the Assessing Officer having failed to establish that there was a failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts for Assessment Year 2005-06, the reopening beyond a period of four years is clearly not valid. There was a finding of fact by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order for Assessment Year 2005-06 that the business activity of the assessee is manufacturing of jewellery in a Special Economic Zone. That finding, as the assessment order notes, was based upon a consideration of the facts of the case and upon examining the contentions of the assessee. When the AO has failed to set out in the reasons recorded as to what facts the assessee has failed to disclose fully and truly then the reopening after 4 years is invalid being without jurisdiction. We do not wish to multiply the precedent on this issue though relied upon by the ld. AR of the assessee. Accordingly, in the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the various decisions as stated above we hold that the reopening after 4 years from the end of the assessment year is bad in law being without j ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... old that the reopening of the assessment after four years from the end of the assessment year under consideration and also with reference to the provisions of section 151 is not valid and the same is quashed. 6. Since, we have quashed the validity of the reopening of the case of assessee and consequential reassessment order, therefore, we do not propose to go into the other grounds raised by the assessee as the same have now become infructuous. ITA NO. 123/JP/2021 A.Y. 2010-11. 7. The issues involved in this appeal are identical to issues raised in the appeal in ITA No. 93/JP/2021 for the assessment year 2010-11 in the case of Siyaram Jat. The facts involved in this case are same and revolve around the search and seizure action conducted at the residential and office premises of Shri Madan Mohan Gupta on 23.05.2013. We have decided the appeal in ITA No. 93/JP/2021 wherein we have quashed the proceedings for reopening of the assessee s case. Since the facts involved in this appeal are exactly similar, therefore, the decision arrived at in ITA No. 93/JP/2021 are squarely applicable in this case also. Thus following the view taken in ITA No. 93/JP/2021, we quash the reope ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
