2012 (8) TMI 540

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....l income of Rs. 11,143 which was accepted by the respondent on February 19, 2001, vide intimation issued under section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). The petitioner received the impugned notice dated April 11, 2001 and, therefore, the petitioner addressed a letter dated April 23, 2001, asking for the reasons for issuance of the impugned notice and reopening the assessment for the assessment year 2000-01. The respondent addressed a letter dated May 8, 2001, wherein without supplying the reasons for reassessment, stated therein that the request for the supply of reasons for reopening will be considered on the receipt of return of the income as envisaged in the notice dated April 11, 2001.   Mr....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....,380 respectively. Thus, the difference in valuation requires to be added back to the total income treating the same as unexplained expenses/ investment. The return of income so filed has been processed under section 143(1)(a) which requires to be reopened as per the provisions of section 147 of the Income-tax Act. Moreover, survey operation under section 133A of the Income-tax Act was carried out on January 12, 1999, by the Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Junagadh. Intimation to that effect received on March 20, 2001."   Learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that the reopening of the assessment is based on the survey operation under section 133A of the Act and it was carried out by the Assistant Commissioner of Income- ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cer, for determining the correct cost of construction. The Valuation Officer, Ahmedabad, vide his report, determined the cost of construction for the assessment year 1998-99 at Rs. 49,05,785 and for the assessment year 1999-2000 at Rs. 34,89,830 against the cost of construction declared by the assessee firm for Rs. 21,42,131 and Rs. 17,23,380 respectively. According to the Assessing Officer, the difference in valuation requires to be added back to the total income treating the same as unexplained expenses/ investment and, therefore, the assessment is required to be reopened as per the provisions of section 147 of the Income-tax Act.   From the reasons recorded, it is apparent that the sole ground for reopening the assessment is that t....