9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (1) TMI 808X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent order u/s. 147 when no addition has been made on the issue with respect to which the case of the assessee was reopened at the time of initiation of reassessment proceedings u/s 147. Once no addition has been made with respect to the reasons recorded for reopening of the concluded assessment which formed the belief of the AO that income has escaped assessment, re-assessment order cannot be upheld/sustained if the additions are made on the other issues while no additions have been made on the issue on the basis of which the concluded assessment were reopened u/s 147 and which formed the belief of the Revenue that income has escaped assessment. See Jet Airways (I) Ltd [ 2010 (4) TMI 431 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] , Sunlight Tour Travels Pvt Ltd. [ 2024 (11) TMI 1384 - DELHI HIGH COURT] No additions have been made on the grounds/issues on the basis of which assessment was reopened u/s. 147 and which formed the belief that the income has escaped assessment, then AO cannot make addition on other grounds/issues. Appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. - Shri Ramit Kochar, Accountant Member For the Assessee : Ms. Prarthana Jalan, C.A. For the Revenue : Sh. Shailendra Srivastava, Sr. DR. O ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rticipated in the reassessment proceedings, and furnished most of the information and replies during the course of reassessment proceedings. The assessee was having income from salary, income from house property, Remuneration and interest from Partnership firm and income from other sources. While framing reassessment order u/s 147 read with Section 143(3) dated 24.10.2019, the Assessing Officer made two additions firstly, disallowance of Rs. 12,15,413/- claimed by the assessee as expenditure against income from other sources by invoking provision of Section 57(iii) of the Act as the assessee could not furnish any evidences in respect of these expenses , and secondly disallowance of speculation loss of Rs. 56,407/- under the head income from business or profession claimed as deduction from interest and remuneration from Partnership Firm as claimed by the assessee in the return of income filed with the Revenue, as the assessee could not furnish any evidences in respect of this loss. 4. Aggrieved, the assessee filed first appeal with ld. CIT(Appeals) and the appeal was dismissed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) vide appellate order dated 15.11.2022. 5. Aggrieved, the assessee has filed second ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ideration but no assessment as stipulated u/s. 2(40) of the Act was made and the return of income was only processed u/s. 143(1) of the Act. In view of the above, the provisions of clause (b) of Explanation 2 to Sec. 147 are applicable to the facts of this case and the A.Y. under consideration is deemed to be a case where income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. Sd/- 16/03/19 Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 3(1), Etah 5.2. Thus, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the case of the assessee was reopened on the ground that the assessee has not provided any documents to substantiate the source of investment of Rs. 1,37,45,896/- in the share transactions which forms the belief that the income to that extent has allegedly escaped assessment as per the Revenue, and the case of the assessee was reopened for framing reassessment u/s 147. My attention was drawn to page 3 of PB filed by the assessee, wherein the AO issued notice dated 08.03.2019 u/s 133(6)(PB /Page 3) seeking information/evidences about the sources of transactions towards purchase of shares to the tune of Rs. 1,37,45,896/- alongwith bank statement and copy of ITR along with all annexures viz. P L Acc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... without making any investment. 6. Learned Sr. DR relied upon the orders of authorities below. 7. I have considered the contentions of both the parties and perused the material on record. I have observed that the assessee filed return of income on 11.07.2012 u/s 139(1), declaring total income of Rs. 8,16,230. Case of the assessee was reopened by the Revenue for framing reassessment by invoking provisions of section 147. Notice u/s. 148 dated 26.03.2019 was issued by the Assessing Officer to the assessee. The assessee submitted that return of income originally filed be treated as return of income filed in response to notice u/s. 148 of the Act. Statutory notices u/s. 143(2) and 142(1) were issued by the Assessing Officer to the assessee in re-assessment proceedings. The assessee participated in the re-assessment proceedings. The assessee is drawing income from salary, income from house property, Remuneration and Interest from Partnership, and income from other sources. I have observed that the case of the assessee was reopened by Revenue by invoking provisions of Section 147 on the belief that income to the tune of Rs. 1,37,45,896/- has escaped assessment with respect to investment m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... addition has been made on the issue with respect to which the case of the assessee was reopened at the time of initiation of reassessment proceedings u/s 147. I have observed that the assessee has relied upon following judgments and orders, wherein re-assessments were quashed on the ground that once no addition has been made with respect to the reasons recorded for reopening of the concluded assessment which formed the belief of the AO that income has escaped assessment, re-assessment order cannot be upheld/sustained if the additions are made on the other issues while no additions have been made on the issue on the basis of which the concluded assessment were reopened u/s 147 and which formed the belief of the Revenue that income has escaped assessment: 1 Hon ble Bombay High Court CIT v/s Jet Airways (I) Ltd in IT Appeal Nos 1526 of 2008 1714 of 2009 2. Hon ble Delhi High Court Pr. CIT v/s Sunlight Tour Travels Pvt Ltd in ITA No 222/2022 3. Hon ble Agra ITAT- Anugrah Varshney v/s Income Tax Officer in ITA No 134/Ag/2014 4. Hon ble Agra ITAT Vacmet India Ltd v/s DCIT in ITA No 334/AGR/2019 5. Hon ble Mumbai ITAT- Sandeep Kumar Hissaria v/s ITO in ITA No 1571/Mum/2012 6. Hon ble Mum ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
