Court sets aside assessment reopening notice for Assessment Year 2011-12; petitioner's full disclosure considered, notice invalid.

The High Court ruled in favor of the petitioner, setting aside the notice seeking to reopen the assessment for Assessment Year 2011-12. The court found that the petitioner had made full disclosure during the regular assessment proceedings, and the notice was issued beyond the prescribed time limit without relying on fresh material, rendering it invalid under the law. The court concluded that there was no justification for reopening the assessment, leading to the writ petition being allowed with no costs awarded.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to order seeking to reopen assessment for Assessment Year 2011-12 based on full and true disclosure of material facts during regular assessment proceedings.

Analysis:
The petition under Article 226 challenges an order seeking to reopen the assessment for Assessment Year 2011-12 based on the petitioner's sale of a house property and the gain offered to tax under 'long term capital gain.' The petitioner deducted sums paid to his wife and father from the total consideration received on the sale. The Assessing Officer passed an assessment order under section 143(3) of the Act in 2014, where the petitioner's wife and father also offered tax on the amounts received. The impugned notice to reopen the assessment in 2018 questioned the compensation paid to the petitioner's wife and father, claiming it was not justifiable as the petitioner was the sole owner of the property. The notice alleged that the income liable for taxation had escaped assessment due to the petitioner's failure to fully disclose material facts necessary for assessment. The notice was issued beyond four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, based on facts already on record.

The High Court noted that the petitioner made full and complete disclosure during the regular assessment proceedings regarding the sale of the house property and the compensation paid to his wife and father. The court emphasized that the impugned notice was issued beyond the prescribed time limit and did not rely on fresh material, making it invalid under the proviso to Section 147 of the Act. The court concluded that there was complete disclosure of material facts during the regular assessment, leading to the quashing and setting aside of the impugned notice.

In conclusion, the court allowed the writ petition, ruling in favor of the petitioner and setting aside the impugned notice seeking to reopen the assessment for Assessment Year 2011-12. No costs were awarded in the matter.

---