TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>ITAT rules in favor of appellant in assessment reopening case under Income Tax Act</h1> <h3>M/s. Rathi Ceramics Pvt. Ltd. Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward 15 (3), New Delhi</h3> M/s. Rathi Ceramics Pvt. Ltd. Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward 15 (3), New Delhi - TMI Issues:1. Reopening of assessment under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.2. Applicability of the proviso to section 147 of the Act.3. Alleged lack of tangible material for reopening assessment.4. Change of opinion in reopening assessment.5. Discrepancy in assessment of total income.Analysis:Issue 1: Reopening of assessment under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961:The appeal was filed against the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) relating to the assessment year 2005-06. The original return of income was filed in 2005 and the assessment order under section 143(3) was passed in 2007. Subsequently, the assessment was reopened under section 147 based on a report regarding share capital received from certain companies. The reassessment was completed in 2013, leading to the appeal before the ITAT.Issue 2: Applicability of the proviso to section 147 of the Act:The appellant contested that the proviso to section 147 was not applicable as there was no failure on their part to disclose material facts necessary for assessment. The second notice under section 148 was issued after four years from the end of the assessment year without any such failure. The argument was made that the reopening was not justified under the given circumstances.Issue 3: Alleged lack of tangible material for reopening assessment:The appellant argued that there was no tangible material to support the reopening of the assessment. It was contended that the information received was not adequately considered, and there was a lack of application of mind in attributing the alleged entries to the appellant. The absence of sufficient grounds for reopening the assessment was highlighted.Issue 4: Change of opinion in reopening assessment:The appellant claimed that the reopening of assessment on the second occasion amounted to a change of opinion, which is impermissible under the law. It was contended that the reassessment was merely a reevaluation of the same facts without any new material warranting such action.Issue 5: Discrepancy in assessment of total income:The appellant disputed the assessment of total income at Rs. 50,38,750, as opposed to the returned income of Rs. 1250. The denial of liability for such an assessment was a key contention. The appellant sought to challenge the upheld assessment on the grounds of discrepancy and lack of proper justification for the revised total income.In the detailed analysis, the ITAT considered the submissions of both parties, reviewed relevant documents, and cited legal precedents. Ultimately, the ITAT ruled in favor of the appellant, deleting the addition in dispute and allowing the grounds raised. The decision was based on the lack of adverse observations or comments by the assessing officer on the documents submitted by the appellant, thereby concluding that the addition to the income could not be sustained. The judgment was pronounced on 04.02.2019.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
