Reopening assessment under Section 147 beyond four years invalid due to incorrect factual assumptions and lack of nexus ITAT Mumbai held that reopening assessment u/s 147 beyond four years was invalid due to incorrect assumption of facts. The AO's reasons for reopening ...
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Reopening assessment under Section 147 beyond four years invalid due to incorrect factual assumptions and lack of nexus
ITAT Mumbai held that reopening assessment u/s 147 beyond four years was invalid due to incorrect assumption of facts. The AO's reasons for reopening lacked live link nexus with income escaping assessment, as companies receiving share application money were not connected to entities mentioned in third-party statement. Without valid material and information relevant to assessee, AO cannot reopen case based on wrong factual assumptions. Notice u/s 148 and entire reassessment order quashed on jurisdictional grounds. Appeal allowed.
Issues: Validity of reopening u/s. 147 and issuance of notice u/s. 148 beyond four years, Addition of Rs. 99,00,000 towards share application money u/s. 68.
Analysis: The assessee challenged the validity of the reopening u/s. 147 and issuance of notice u/s. 148 beyond the four-year period, along with the addition of Rs. 99,00,000 towards share application money u/s. 68. The return of income was filed on 29/09/2009, and the assessment was completed u/s. 143(3) on 23/12/2011. Subsequently, notice u/s. 148 was issued on 29/01/2013, and a second reopening was done on 30/03/2016 based on information received regarding accommodation entry amounting to Rs. 20,00,000. The AO added Rs. 99,00,000 towards share application money from six entities controlled by Pravin Jain group, considering it as an accommodation entry. The CIT(A) upheld this addition. The assessee contended that the reopening was based on wrong assumptions, as the companies providing share application money were not linked to Pravin Jain group.
The AO's contention was that since the assessee failed to prove the genuineness and creditworthiness of the parties providing share application money, the reopening was valid. However, the Tribunal found that there was a lack of correlation between the reasons recorded and the actual facts. The reasons for reopening mentioned an accommodation entry of Rs. 20,00,000, but the actual entries in the books showed share application money from different entities totaling Rs. 99,00,000. The Tribunal noted that the AO did not specify the nature of the alleged accommodation entry or its connection to Pravin Jain group. The Tribunal emphasized that for a valid reopening, there must be a live link nexus between the information and income escaping assessment.
The Tribunal further highlighted that the list of companies provided by Pravin Jain did not include the entities from which the share application money was received. This discrepancy indicated a flawed premise for the reopening. The Tribunal concluded that the reasons recorded did not confer jurisdiction to reopen the assessment u/s. 147 for the second time. Consequently, the Tribunal quashed the reassessment order based on the invalid reasons recorded and notice issued u/s. 148. Ultimately, the appeal of the assessee was allowed on the jurisdictional issue.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
