Appeals allowed due to improper assessment basis under Wealth-tax Act

The Tribunal allowed the appeals of the assessee, holding that the reassessment proceedings were invalid due to the improper basis for reopening the assessment. The reassessment under section 17(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, was quashed as it solely relied on a DVO's report without independent assessment by the Assessing Officer. The orders passed under section 16(3) r.w.s. 17(1) were held to be without basis. The decision was pronounced on June 24, 2019.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Validity of reassessment under section 17(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957.
2. Basis for reopening the assessment using the DVO’s report.

Issue-Wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Validity of Reassessment under section 17(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957:

The primary issue raised by the assessee was the validity of the reassessment initiated by the Assessing Officer (AO) under section 17(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957. The assessee had not filed a return of wealth for the relevant assessment year. The AO recorded reasons for reopening the assessment and issued a notice under section 17(1) of the Act. However, the assessee did not request the reasons for reopening during the assessment proceedings but raised the issue before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) decided the case on merits rather than on jurisdictional grounds.

The Tribunal noted that the jurisdiction to reopen an assessment under section 17(1) can be exercised if there is a reason to believe that wealth has escaped assessment. The AO must record reasons for reopening and issue a notice under section 18 of the Act. In this case, the reasons for reopening were based on an order passed under section 25(2) of the Act by the CIT-II, Pune, which relied on a DVO’s report valuing the property as on 31.03.2001. The Tribunal found that the reasons recorded were undated and that the approval for reopening was sought and granted in March 2012.

2. Basis for Reopening the Assessment Using the DVO’s Report:

The assessee argued that the reopening of the assessment based on the DVO’s report was invalid, referencing the Supreme Court’s decision in ACIT Vs. Dhariya Construction Company, which held that a DVO’s report alone cannot constitute information for reopening an assessment. The Tribunal examined the reasons recorded for reopening, which were based on the CIT’s order under section 25(2) that itself relied on the DVO’s report. The DVO’s report valued the property as on 31.03.2001, while the reassessment was for the year 2005-06.

The Tribunal found that the AO had not independently applied his mind to the information and had relied solely on the DVO’s report. The Tribunal held that the reopening of the assessment was invalid as it was based on an opinion rather than information, and the AO had failed to form a belief based on the information. Consequently, the reassessment proceedings and the orders passed under section 16(3) r.w.s. 17(1) were held to be without basis and were quashed.

Conclusion:

The Tribunal allowed the appeals of the assessee, holding that the reassessment proceedings were invalid due to the improper basis for reopening the assessment. The decision in WTA No.39/PUN/2019 was applied mutatis mutandis to the other appeals (WTA Nos.40/PUN/2019 to 44/PUN/2019), resulting in all appeals being allowed. The order was pronounced on June 24, 2019.

---