TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (6) TMI 914
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aterial facts necessary for assessing its income. 2.2 The learned CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that mere production of details before the assessing officer from which material evidence would have been discovered with due diligence will not necessarily amount to disclosure within the provisions of section 147 of the Act. 2.3 Having regard to the above facts and circumstances, the ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the proviso to sec.147 is not applicable to the facts of the case. 2.4 It is further submitted that while disposing the Writ Petition in the case of M/s. Dalmia P Ltd Vs. CIT in WP(Civil) No.6205 of 2010 dated 26.09.2011, the Hon' ble Delhi High Court held, "Even when there was specific and pointed queries in Sec.143(3) assessment, AO cannot be said to have formed any opinion. If explicit opinion was not recorded, certainly the AO cannot be said to have formed any opinion in the first instance, to render the reasons recorded for reopening the assessment, as a change of opinion." 3. The Ld CIT(A) erred in deleting the disallowance made u/s 40(a)(ia) amounting to ₹ 3.54 crores on land development expenses and JCB charges; 3.1 The Ld CIT(Appeals) ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he validity of the reopening of the assessment made by the Assessing Officer under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The second issue is regarding the deletion of the additions made by the Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals). The first issue is on the question of jurisdiction and the second issue is on merit. 4. First we will consider the question of law regarding assumption of jurisdiction. The assessee had filed its original return on 29-12-2006. Initially, the return was processed and filed. Thereafter, the return was selected for scrutiny assessment. The scrutiny assessment was completed under section 143(3) on 31-12-2008. Thereafter, a notice under section 148 was issued on 25-3-2011. The assessee complied with the notice by requesting the Assessing Officer to treat the original return filed by it as the return filed in response to the notice under section 148. 5. The Assessing Officer has communicated the reason for reopening of the assessment through his letter dated 19-10-2011. According to the Assessing Officer the reopening was made to verify the claim of expenses of ₹ 41,70,64,648/- incurred by the assessee as cost of land development. The Assessing Office....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....persons who undertook the JCB work along with the books of accocunts and vouchers 5 01.12.2008 Details of Tractor hire charges along with the relevant documents to prove that at no point of time an individual tractor owner was paid ₹ 20000/- through a single payment and ₹ 50000/- per annum. The books of accounts and corresponding vouchers were also produced. 6 03.12.2008 Clarification regarding the non applicability of TDS provisions on a major portion of JCB and Bull Dozer Charges 7 12.12.2008 Details regarding the payment of stamp duty 8 19.12.2008 Clarification regarding the wrong nomenclature of actual land cost posted under the head Land Development Cost by mistake along with necessary and supportive documents. 9 24.12.2008 Clarification regarding the correctness of Land Cost, being the amount payable to the Managing Director Shri R.P.Darmalingam. 10 24.12.2008 Submission of details on cost of infrastructural development of land. 8. The Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals) examined the details of enquiries and verifications made by the Assessing Officer at the time of original assessment completed under section 143(3) and the reasons highlighted b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nstitutional courts, the Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals) held that the impugned reassessment is invalid and he accordingly set aside the assessment. 9. On hearing both sides in detail and perusing the material on record, we are of the considered opinion that we have no reason to deviate from the decision taken by the Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals). The synopsis of the details furnished by the assessee, reproduced by the Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals) in page 3 of his order, clearly shows that the Assessing Officer had called for almost all the relevant details necessary for completing the assessment under section 143(3). The Assessing Officer had called for the details of land development expenditure including the details of TDS compliance, break-up of JCB, bulldozer tractor hire charges and particulars of TDS made thereon, the details regarding payment, if any, made for more than ₹ 20,000/- by way of cash, etc. The reason for reopening of the assessment, as stated by the Assessing Officer, was to examine the same items of expenditure once again. The first point wanted to be verified by the Assessing Officer is the claim of expenses towards land development. Th....