2016 (8) TMI 160 - HC - Income Tax

Reopening assessment solely for failure to deduct tax at source impermissible. Court holds against revisiting issue in reassessment.

PRATIK ENTERPRISE Versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PRATIK ENTERPRISE Versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - TMI Issues Involved:Challenge to the notice for reopening the assessment for the assessment year 2006-2007 based on failure to disclose material facts and disallowance of expenses without deduction of tax at source.Analysis:Issue 1: Challenge to the Notice for ReopeningThe petitioner challenged a notice dated 29.3.2012 issued by the Assessing Officer to reopen the assessment for the assessment year 2006-2007. The petitioner contended that there was no failure on their part to disclose all material facts, rendering the notice unauthorized. The petitioner also argued that the issue of tax deduction at source was already examined during the original scrutiny assessment and should not be revisited in reassessment. Furthermore, the petitioner claimed that there was no tangible material for the Assessing Officer to believe that taxable income had escaped assessment.Issue 2: Failure to Deduct Tax at SourceThe Assessing Officer issued the impugned notice due to the petitioner's failure to deduct tax at source on payments made to various parties, totaling &8377;1.19,72,036. The notice was based on Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act. However, the High Court noted that the payments in question were part of the original assessment record and were discussed during the initial assessment. The Assessing Officer had requested details of these payments during the original assessment, and the petitioner had provided the necessary information. The Court observed that the Assessing Officer had already made ad hoc disallowances towards these expenses in the original assessment, indicating that the expenses were scrutinized for genuineness.Conclusion:The High Court held that since the payments subject to tax deduction at source were part of the original assessment record and were examined during the initial assessment, reopening the assessment beyond four years solely on this ground was impermissible. Additionally, the Court noted that the petitioner had clarified during the original assessment that no tax was deducted at source, which was accepted by the Assessing Officer at that time. Therefore, any attempt to revisit this issue in reassessment would amount to a change of opinion. Consequently, the petition was allowed, the notice dated 29.3.2012 was set aside, and the petition was disposed of.