TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (4) TMI 348
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... under : "That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer with regard to reopening of the case u/s 148 and also there were no reasons to believe that the income of the assessee had escaped assessment. 2. At the time of hearing, ld. AR invited attention to the aforesaid ground and submitted that in the facts of the present case, the jurisdiction assumed by the AO was not valid and hence unsustainable in law. In the facts of the present case, it was submitted that it was patently a case of non application of mind evident from the reasons recorded itself . This fact, it was submitted, would be evident from page 1 para 2 of the assessment order read alongwith page 2 para 2 of the Paper Book wherein re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ri Surinder appeared before the AO and confirmed the transaction and the source. However, in view of unregistered documentary evidences, the AO proceeded to make the addition. Apart from that, certain additions were also made on account of dairy and the activity of running a combined harvester etc. to the returned income of Rs. 2,95,000/- (+) Rs. 3,00,000/- agriculture income. As a result of the additions, total taxable income of Rs. 46,70,654/- was assessed. 5. The assessee carried the issue in appeal before the CIT(A) both on merits as well as challenging the action on assumption of jurisdiction also. The jurisdictional issue was decided against the assessee on which ld. DR has placed reliance. The relevant finding is extracted hereund....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....) issued." (bold text for emphasis) 8. The said reason is patently contradictory to the facts recorded in the assessment order itself. The language recorded in the reasons recorded gives credence and strength to the allegation raised on behalf of the assessee that it is a mechanical exercise of power wherein non-application of mind is clearly evident as no effort was made to see whether any return had been filed or not by the assessee. Had such an exercise been attempted, the return filed would have been noticed and application of mind would have been based on cogent facts. In the facts as they stand, the formation of belief that income has escaped assessment is plainly a mechanical exercise looking of non-application of mind. O....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... " that it was apparent that the fact of non-filing of the return for the assessment year 1991-92 had weighted with the respondent for arriving at the satisfaction about the failure on the part of the assessee and escapement of assessment of income. However, the material on record showed that the return had been filed. In such circumstances, it could not be said with certainty as to which fact would have weighed with the officer concerned and once it was shown that an irrelevant fact had been taken into consideration, to what extent the decision was vitiated woulod be difficult to say. Moreover the Income-tax Officer had stated that the payment which was stated to be undisclosed income relevant for the assessment year I99J-92 cou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... there was failure on the part of ht assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts during the course of original assessment proceedings. Hence the reopening of assessment of AY 2005-06 is liable to be quashed on these two grounds a/so. Accordingly we set aside the order passed by Ld. CIT(A) on this issue and hold that the reopening of assessments of both the years are not in accordance with the law and accordingly quash the assessment orders passed for both the years under consideration." 10.5 Similar view has been taken by the ITAT Jaipur Bench in case of Shri Ram Mohan Rawat Vs. ITO(supra) vide order dt. 10/10/2019 the relevant findings given therein read as under: 'Thus the reasons recorded by the AO for f....