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>Appeal allowed, reassessment quashed under Section 147 due to lack of new material or independent assessment.</h1> <h3>Exim India Oil Company Ltd. Versus DCIT, Circle 1 (1) Cuttack</h3> Exim India Oil Company Ltd. Versus DCIT, Circle 1 (1) Cuttack - TMI Issues Involved:1. Condonation of delay in filing the appeal.2. Validity of reassessment proceedings under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act.3. Absence of fresh tangible material for reopening the assessment.4. Application of mind by the Assessing Officer (AO) in initiating reassessment proceedings.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:Condonation of Delay in Filing the Appeal:The appeal was initially dismissed due to the assessee's non-appearance and a delay of 1415 days in filing. However, the delay was condoned as the assessee provided valid reasons, including financial stringency and liquidation status, for the shortfall in appeal fees. The Tribunal concluded that the appeal was filed within the prescribed time once the fee defect was rectified, thus there was no delay in filing.Validity of Reassessment Proceedings under Section 147:The assessee contended that the reassessment proceedings were initiated without an independent exercise of judicial mind by the AO, and that the CIT(A) merely suggested the reassessment. The Tribunal noted that the AO must have 'reasons to believe' that income had escaped assessment, based on new tangible material, which was not present in this case. The reassessment was deemed an afterthought and not sustainable as per the provisions of the Act and relevant case laws.Absence of Fresh Tangible Material for Reopening the Assessment:The Tribunal emphasized that there was no new tangible material before the AO that was not available during the initial processing of the return. The AO's reasons for reopening were based solely on the CIT(A)'s procedural suggestions without any fresh evidence. This lack of new material rendered the reassessment proceedings invalid, aligning with the Supreme Court's rulings in Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd. and Kelvinator of India Ltd.Application of Mind by the AO in Initiating Reassessment Proceedings:The Tribunal found that the AO did not independently apply his mind or record any new basis or facts to justify the reassessment. The AO's satisfaction note lacked substantive reasoning and was merely a reproduction of the CIT(A)'s observations. This failure to demonstrate an independent application of mind and absence of tangible material led to the quashing of the reassessment proceedings.Conclusion:The Tribunal allowed the appeal, quashing the reassessment proceedings under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act due to the absence of new tangible material and lack of independent application of mind by the AO. Consequently, other grounds on merits became infructuous. The order was pronounced on 10/5/2021.
TaxTMI 