9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (8) TMI 324X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ht in law in holding that the reopening of the assessment under section 147 of the Income-tax Act is bad in law and the reopened assessment is annulled, even though the Assessing Officer complied with the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) for the assessment years 1991-92 to 1994-95 ?" 2. The facts leading to the above substantial question of law are as under : The assessee is an individual. The relevant assessment year is 1993-94 and the corresponding accounting year ended on March 31, 1993. The assessee filed the return of income on December 8, 1996, admitting income at Rs. 55,530 from maligai business and Rs. 20,000 from agriculture. The assessee has constructed a shopping space-cum-kalyana mandapam during t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... allowed the appeal filed by the assessee on the ground that reopening of the assessment is bad in law and also relied on this court judgment in the case of CIT v. V. T. Rajendran [2007] 288 ITR 312. Hence the present tax case by the Revenue. 3. Learned senior standing counsel appearing for the Revenue submitted that the Assessing Officer has reopened and completed the assessment in view of the direction given by the earlier Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)'s order, stated supra and hence the reopening of the assessment is valid in law. Therefore, the order passed by the Tribunal holding that reopening is bad in law is wrong, illegal, without basis and justification. 4. Heard counsel. The assessee constructed a shopping space-cum ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... year, the Assessing Officer reopened the assessment under section 147 of the Act. There is no dispute that the direction given in the earlier order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) is on the basis of the Departmental Valuer's Report. In this case, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that reopening of the assessment is on the basis of the Departmental Valuer's Report. The Tribunal also relied on this court judgment in the case of CIT v. V. T. Rajendran [2007] 288 ITR 312, wherein it was held as follows (page 315) : "That apart, we do not hesitate to hold that the report of the Departmental Valuation Officer cannot be a basis because the valuation cannot be an arithmetical appreciation of the materials used for the construction n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
