2019 (8) TMI 985

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s of Rs. 1,56,94,258/-. Scrutiny assessment u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") was completed in the case of assessee on 18-12-2009 accepting the loss returned by the assessee. Thereafter, the assessment was reopened by the Assessing Officer and notice u/s. 148 of the Act was issued on 07-02-2014. In reassessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer made addition on account of difference in receipts of sundry debtors Rs. 1,11,63,551/-. Aggrieved against the assessment order dated 31-12-2014 passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act, the assessee filed appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), assailing reopening of assessment as well as, the addition made on merits. The Commissioner o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....on by the Assessing Officer. The ld. AR further submitted that the assessee during scrutiny assessment proceedings had furnished complete details of sundry debtors and party wise details of sale. The reassessment proceedings have been initiated after reappreciation of material already available with the Assessing Officer. The ld. AR vehemently defended the impugned order and prayed for dismissing the appeal of Revenue. 4. On the other hand Shri N. Ashok Babu representing the Department vehemently defended the action of Assessing Officer in reopening the assessment. The ld. DR submitted that during assessment proceedings the Assessing Officer in the absence of documentary evidence could not consider the issue of sundry debtors. There was ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... An amount of Rs. 1,11,63,551/- on account of difference in receipts of Sundry debtors is inadvertently remained to be added to the total income of the assessee. In view of the above, I have reasons to believe that there is an escapement of income u/s. 147 of the I.T. Act, 1961." 6. A bare perusal of reasons for reopening would show that the Assessing Officer has erred in invoking the provisions of section 148 r.w.s. 147 after the expiry of four years to cover up his own follies. It is not the case of Revenue that the assessee has not fully and truly disclosed all material facts necessary for its assessment. The proviso to section 147 mandates that the assessment can be reopened inter alia, where the assessee has failed to discl....