Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether reassessment initiated after expiry of four years from the original assessment was invalid for want of a recorded failure by the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment.
Analysis: The reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer specifically referred to the joint development agreement, the alleged handing over of possession, and the consequent escapement of income, and also asserted that the assessee had failed to disclose the contents of the transaction fully. Such recorded reasons were sufficient to confer jurisdiction to reopen the assessment. The Tribunal, without properly examining the recorded reasons, held in a cursory manner that no such failure had been mentioned, which rendered its finding unsustainable.
Conclusion: The reassessment was held to be validly reopened, and the Tribunal's order setting aside the reassessment was held to be erroneous, in favour of the Revenue.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the recorded reasons for reopening an assessment beyond four years disclose escapement of income and assert nondisclosure of material facts, jurisdiction to reopen is attracted and a contrary finding entered without proper examination of those reasons is perverse.