9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (6) TMI 565X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under section 143(3) has been completed unless there was failure to disclose material facts truly and fully. In the instant case, from the reasons recorded, it is revealed that there was no allegation in the reasons recorded that there was any failure on the part of assessee to truly and fully disclose all material facts necessary for its assessment for the relevant assessment year. In our view, such an assessment order passed u/s 147 and confirmed by the CIT(A) is bad in law and deserves to be quashed. Apex Court in Canara Bank [ 2023 (9) TMI 1043 - SC ORDER] has dismissed SLP filed against the order of the High Court where it was held that where notice u/s 148 is to be issued after expiry of four years or before expiry of six years, assessee should have failed to disclose material facts, hence, where AO had not even stated or alleged that there was failure on part of assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts in respect of claim of deduction under section 36(1)(viia), Tribunal rightly held that reopening assessment initiated beyond four years was bad in law - Whether SLP filed by revenue against said impugned order was to be dismissed. Similarly, the Hon ble Jurisdic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the said saving bank account was duly disclosed in the balance sheet and P L account produced at the stage of scrutiny assessment u/s 143(3). The AR has drawn attention of the Bench to para no 2 of assessment order passed u/s 143(3) of the Act (APB,Pg.7)wherein the impugned saving bank account has been mentioned. He further submitted that the appellant has only one saving account that has been disclosed in filing the return of income and subsequently considered in the assessment order passed u/s 143(3). As such, these materials were on face of a document available before Assessing Officer who passed original assessment order. Therefore, it is apparently clear that the Assessing Officer has acted on the basis of AIR information which has already been considered by the AO while framing the assessment u/s 143(3). Thus, he argued that the notice issued u/s 148 was invalid and so the assessment order passed 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, as it was in violation of 1stproviso to section 147 of the Act. In support, he filed a brief synopsis, relevant part of the same reads as under: Particulars Page Copy of assessment order passed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act 1961 dated 12.12 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the part of assessee to disclose truly and fully all material facts necessary for its assessment. The copy of reasons recorded is enclosed at page no 37 of the PB. 11.4 In this regard reliance is being placed upon the following case laws in which various courts have held that where the reasons recorded fail to whisper that there was any failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts, in such a case, reopening beyond 4 years is bad in law: - a) [2023] 155 taxmann.com 290 (SC) SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Commissioner of Income-tax v. Canara Bank* Section 36(1)(viia), read with section 148, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Bad debts, in case of banks (Reassessment) - Assessment years 2006-07 and 2007-08 - High Court by impugned order held that where notice under section 148 is to be issued after expiry of four years or before expiry of six years, assessee should have failed to disclose material facts, hence, where Assessing Officer had not even stated or alleged that there was failure on part of assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts in respect of claim of deduction under section 36(1)(viia). Tribunal rightly held that reopening assessmen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ltd in the Balance sheet and profit and loss account filed with the return of income for the relevant assessment year and duly considered by the AO while passing the Assessment order u/s 143(3) of the Act dated 12/12/2011. In our view, the Assessing Officer (in short the AO ) ought to have examined the information received in the context of the material facts disclosed by the appellant on record. If such an exercise would have been done, it is most likely that the AO would have come to the conclusion that there was no failure on the part of the appellant to disclose truly and fully all material facts necessary for assessment. 6. Thus, the entire proceedings in the present case would be hit by 1st proviso to section 147 which bars any reopening after the expiry of four years where assessment under section 143(3) has been completed unless there was failure to disclose material facts truly and fully. The relevant text of the section is being produced hereunder: - Provided that where an assessment under sub-section (3) of section 143 or this section has been made for the relevant assessment year, no action shall be taken under this section after the expiry of four years from the end of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
