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>Assessment reopening quashed where income already settled under Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme section 147</h1> <h3>M/s Shroff Tradelink Pvt. Ltd Versus The Income Tax Officer, Ward 1 (1), Kolkata</h3> M/s Shroff Tradelink Pvt. Ltd Versus The Income Tax Officer, Ward 1 (1), Kolkata - TMI ISSUES: Whether the delay in filing the appeal can be condoned on grounds of bonafide and genuine reasons.Whether the reopening of assessment under section 147 of the Income-tax Act is valid when based on the same material already considered in earlier assessment proceedings.Whether reopening of assessment is permissible after the income has been finally settled under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme (VSVS).Whether the addition of undisclosed income on account of accommodation entries is justified where the income has been previously estimated and assessed. RULINGS / HOLDINGS: The delay in filing the appeal was condoned as it was due to the assessee's inability to access the department's e-portal, constituting 'bonafide and genuine reasons'.The reopening of assessment under section 147 was held invalid and quashed because it was based on 'the same material' that had already been examined and assessed in the original reassessment proceedings.Once the income was 'finally settled in the VSVS Scheme,' no further reopening of assessment on the same income is permissible.The addition of undisclosed income on account of accommodation entries was not sustained where the income was already estimated on bank deposits and subjected to reassessment and settlement under VSVS. RATIONALE: The Court applied the provisions of section 147 and section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which govern reopening of assessments, emphasizing that reopening cannot be based on material already available and considered in earlier proceedings.The Court relied on the principle that reopening must be justified by 'new information' or 'material' not previously available to the Assessing Officer.The finality of settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme (section 5(2) of the scheme rules) was recognized as a bar to further reassessment on the same income.The Court distinguished between initial assessment and reassessment, holding that reassessment cannot be a tool for re-litigating issues already settled, especially where income was estimated and accepted under scrutiny and settlement schemes.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
