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 reopening of a completed scrutiny assessment under sections 147 and 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, was valid when the very issue of deduction and exemption in respect of capital gains and investment in immovable property had already been examined in the original assessment.
Analysis: The return of income was subjected to scrutiny and the assessee had furnished the relevant explanation and particulars regarding capital gains and investment in the new residential property. The assessment was completed after considering those materials, which showed that the Assessing Officer had already applied his mind to the claim. The reasons recorded for reopening proceeded on the same factual foundation and on the same issue, namely the alleged non-deposit of the unutilised sale consideration in the Capital Gains Account Scheme. In the absence of any fresh or tangible material, reopening on the same material amounted to a mere change of opinion. A completed assessment cannot be reopened merely because a different view is later taken on facts already considered.
Conclusion: Reopening was invalid and the assessee succeeded on the issue.
Ratio Decidendi: A completed scrutiny assessment cannot be reopened under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on the same material already examined in the original assessment unless there is fresh or tangible material showing escapement of income.