2014 (6) TMI 405 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal rules reassessment invalid, assessee wins appeal

Maanraj Trading Private Limited Versus Dy. CIT, Circle 6(3), Mumbai

The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, finding the reassessment invalid due to lack of new tangible material justifying the reassessment under ... Validity of reassessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act – Bar of limitation - Deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) of the Act - Held that:- The material/or documents filed by the assessee is the source of information for reopening by the AO on the issue relating to the provisions of section 2(22)(e) of the Act - There is no tangible material gathered by the AO which worked as a live wire for the AO to assume jurisdiction validly - the AO already enquired into the issue during the making of the regular assessment – thus, the reassessment made by the AO on the reasons recorded invoking the provisions of section 2(22)(e) of the Act cannot be upheld – Decided in favour of Assessee. Chargeability of the gains on sale of shares/units on proper head of income – Held that:- The gains are short term capital gains and they are earned on the sale of shares/units – the amount even if taxed under the head “Business Income”, there is no tax implication, and thus, there is no tax yielding - concealment of income - no concealment of income is made on this ground. Reassessment relates to the capital nature – expenditure for amalgamation of work - Held that:- the details were available as disclosed by the assessee to the AO and the assessment was completed without making addition on the account after examining the relevant details - There is no defect of disclosure on the issue also on part of the assessee - the proviso to section 147 of the Act has no application – thus, the matter is liable to be remitted back to the AO for reexamination – Decided partly in favour of Assessee. Issues:Validity of reassessment under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.Detailed Analysis:1. The appeal was filed by the assessee against the order of the CIT(A)-XXVI, Mumbai dated 17.02.2009. The key contention was the validity of the reassessment made under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, beyond the four-year period without any defect of disclosure from the assessee's side.2. The assessee argued that the reassessment was based on reasons that were not legally sustainable. The Assessing Officer (A.O.) had already examined the issues during the regular assessment proceedings under section 143(3) without making any additions. The reassessment was challenged on the grounds of a 'change of opinion' and lack of failure to disclose material facts necessary for assessment.3. The ld. CIT-DR for the Revenue supported the reassessment order, citing a judgment from the Allahabad High Court. However, after hearing both parties and reviewing the facts, the Tribunal found merit in the arguments presented by the assessee's counsel. It was observed that the reassessment was based on information already furnished by the assessee and that there was no new tangible material to justify the reassessment under section 147.4. The Tribunal held that the reassessment made by the A.O. invoking the provisions of section 2(22)(e) of the Act was not valid and allowed this part of the ground raised by the assessee.5. Another issue raised was the chargeability of gains on the sale of shares/units under the proper head of income. The Tribunal noted that there was no concealment of income in this regard, and the reassessment made by the A.O. on this account was dismissed.6. The third reason for reassessment related to the capital nature of a sum paid by the assessee to a specific entity. The Tribunal found that this issue had already been addressed during the regular assessment proceedings, and there was no reason for the A.O. to reexamine it under section 147. The reassessment order on this issue was deemed unsustainable.7. The Tribunal concluded that the legal issue regarding the validity of the reassessment was decided in favor of the assessee, rendering the adjudication of other issues raised as academic. Consequently, those grounds were dismissed as academic, and the appeal was partly allowed.In summary, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, finding the reassessment invalid due to lack of new tangible material justifying the reassessment under section 147. The Tribunal also dismissed the reassessment on other grounds related to the chargeability of gains and the nature of certain expenses, as these issues had been adequately addressed during the regular assessment proceedings.