TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (8) TMI 20
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion of Id. AO in reopening the case u/s 147. The action of Id. CIT (A) is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary and against the facts of the case. Relief may please be granted by quashing the reassessment proceedings. 2. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law Id. AO has erred in re- opening the case of the assessee by issuing notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act 1961, being not in accordance with the provisions of Section 151 of Income Tax Act 1961. The action of the ld. AO is illegal, unjustified and arbitrary and against the facts of the case. Relief may please be granted by quashing such re-assessment proceedings. 3. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of ld.. AO of disallowing deduction u/s 54B and, thereby, computing capital gains at Rs. 63,95,407. The action of the ld. CIT (A) is illegal, unjustified and arbitrary and against the facts of the case. Relief may please be granted by quashing the disallowance and deleting the said addition of Rs. 63,95,407. 4. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of I....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....inst the facts of the case. Relief may please be granted by quashing the reassessment proceedings. 3. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, ld. CIT (A) has erred, in confirming the action of ld. AO, by not allowing the claim u/s 54B and, thereby, computing Capital Gains at Rs. 19,92,602. The action of Id. CIT(A) is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary and against the facts of the case. Relief may please be granted by allowing the claim of the assessee made u/s 54B and deleting the said addition of Rs. 19,92,602. 4. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, ld. CIT(A) has erred in rejecting the plea of the assessee, of the land sold by the assessee, during the relevant previous year, being an agricultural land outside the purview of Capital Asset, as defined u/s 2(14) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The action of the ld. CIT(A) is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary and against the facts of the case. Relief may please be granted by deleting the addition, on account of Capital Gains, as made by the Id. AO and sustained by ld. CIT(A). 5. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law ld. CIT (A) has erred in confirming the action of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ho Lal, Shri Kanhaiya Lal and Shri Shankar Lal. Thereafter, the case of the assessee was reopened, pursuant to the search conducted on Shri Madan Mohan Gupta and notice under section 148 was issued to the assessee. Pursuant to such notice issued, assessee filed his return of income declaring total income of Rs. 1,80,544/-. 2.1 Shri Madan Mohan Gupta nowhere in his statements recorded on 23.05.2013, solely on the basis of which the reopening was done, mentioned the fact of assessee having purchased land by paying amount in cash over and above that mentioned in the respective deed. Question no. 21 of the statements of Shri Madan Mohan Gupta on 23.05.2013 as has been relied upon by the ld. AO does not, in any way, relate to the transaction undertaken by the assessee. Merely on the basis of such information, AO reopened the case of the assessee, without having any other corroborative evidence or without recording any satisfaction of 'on money' in the form of cash having been paid by the assessee for purchase of the properties. The AO by issuing notice under section 148 of the IT Act proposed to assess the 'on money' payment made by the assessee for purchase of lands as found in the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....3. Sole basis of the ld. AO in reopening the case of the assessee, for the relevant previous year, was the search conducted on Shri Madan Mohan Gupta. According to the ld. AO, as per the information received by him, Shri Madan Mohan Gupta at the time of answering Question No. 21 of the statements recorded on 23.05.2013, submitted that the details mentioned at Page Number 21 to 25 were related to the land purchased/sold by the assessee. [PB : 4] 1.4. Shri Madan Mohan Gupta nowhere in his statements recorded on 23.05.2013, solely on the basis of which the reopening was done, mentioned the fact of assessee having purchased land by paying amount, in cash, over and above that mentioned in the respective deed. Question No. 21 of the statements of Shri Madan Mohan Gupta on 23.05.2013 as has been relied upon by the ld. AO does not, in any way, relate to the transaction undertaken by the assessee. Snapshot of Q.No. 21 [PB : 134] is set out here under for the sake of ready reference. 1.5. Merely on the basis of such information ld. AO reopened the case of the assessee, without having any other corroborative evidence or without recording any satisfaction of 'on money', in t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 1.10. It reiterated that the sole basis, emerging out of the reasons recorded, of reopening the case of the assessee was the incriminating documents found during the course of search on the premises of Shri Madan Mohan Gupta. 1.11. Reassessment pursuant to material found in search can be done through recourse to section 153C only and not by invoking the provisions of section 147/148. 1.12. The provisions of section 153C are over-riding in nature and contain non obstante clause for sections 139,147,148,149,151 and 153. 1.13. Section 147 and 153C are not interchangeable but are mutually exclusive sections. It is not the choice of the revenue to invoke either of the two sections at its whims. The scope of the two sections has been legislated differently with a definitive purpose. 1.14. For the above ratio reliance is placed on the following judicial pronouncements:- 1.14.i Arun Kumar Kapoor [2011] 140 TTJ 249 (Amritsar) 1.14.ii G. Koteswara Rao [2015] 64 taxmann.com 159 (Visakhapatnam - Trib.) 1.14.iii Rajat Shubra Chatterji, ITA No. 2430/Del/2015, ITAT Delhi Bench 1.15. The above mentioned judgments have be....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....initiating proceedings under section 148 recorded following reasons under section 147 of the Act :- "Reason u/s 148 in the case of Shri Madho Lal Saini for A.Y. 2007-08 Information received from DDIT (Inv)-III, Jaipur during the course of search operation at the business premises of Shri Madan Mohan Gupta at A-30, Saraswati Colony, Sanganer, Jaipur while answering Q. No 21 of this statement dated 23/05/2013, he submitted that the details mentioned of page No.21 to 25 of exhibit-1 of annexure-AS are related to the land purchase/land sale transaction of Shri Kanhaiya Lal, Shankar Lal and Shri Madho Lal. Therefore information was obtained from Raj Stamps, according to while Shri Madho Lal Saini, Shri Shankar Lal Saini and Shri Kanhaiya Lal Saini had purchase/sold land on various dated. Accordingly, to this information, Shri Madho Lal Saini S/o Shri Nanu Ram has sold agriculture land at village- Jaisinghpura, Bankrota for a sale consideration of Rs. 2,07,80,000/- on 01/09/2006. The land has is situated within 8 Kms. of municipal limits and thus, the land sold by the assessee falls within the ambit of the definition of capital asset in terms of provisions of section 2(....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....me or the total income of any other person in respect of which he is assessable under this Act during the previous year exceeded the maximum amount which is not chargeable to income tax; shall also be deemed to be income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment. In view of above, I have reason to believe that the income to the extent of Rs. 6,31,94,300/- has escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the I.T. Act, 1961. Therefore, I am satisfied that it is a fit case for issuing notice u/s 148." Thus the Assessing Officer has proceeded on the premises that the assessee along with his two sons Shri Shankar Lal Saini and Shri Kanhiya Lal Saini had invested the money in purchase of land as aforesaid. The diary found from the possession of Shri Madan Mohan Gupta allegedly contained dealings in respect of certain properties purchased by the assessee along with his two sons, namely Shri Shankar Lal Saini and Shri Kanhiya Lal Saini. The details recorded in the seized diary found from Shri Madan Mohan Gupta revealed the payment of cash in respect of the land purchased by Saini family members i.e. father and sons. The statement of Shri Madan Mohan Gupta was re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... regarding the payment of cash but both these brothers have denied the payment of cash in respect of the land purchased by them. Therefore, even if the seized material along with the statements of Shri Madan Mohan Gupta and Saini family members are taken into consideration nothing has come out to be regarded as any incriminating material or fact to reveal any cash payments by the assessee for purchase of lands in question. The addition made by the AO is solely on his own presumption of payment of cash without any tangible material or evidence in support of his decision. When the seized material found from Shri Madan Mohan Gupta as well as other material gathered during post search inquiry has not established any direct or proxy connection with the transaction of purchase of land by the assessee then the assumption and presumption of the AO that the assessee might have paid cash over and above the consideration shown in the sale deeds is only surmises and conjectures. We note that the Assessing Officer of the assessee, while framing the assessment under section 144 read with section 147 of the Act dated 18.03.2015 accepted the sale consideration as recorded in the sale deeds for the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rom the residence and business premise of Shri Madan Mohan Gupta during the course of search proceedings revealed that on various page of Exhibit- 1,2 & 5 of Annexure-A as well as Exhibit-1 of Annexure-As, some date wise amounts have been written in the name of 'KGK'. These transactions noted on page no. 28,43,69 and 73 of Exhibit-1 of Annexure-A total up to Rs. 14,24,12,650/-. The assessee has failed to satisfactorily explain the transactions recorded on this page. I have thus reason to believe that income to the extent of Rs. 14,24,12,650/- has escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147of the I.T. Act, 1961." Thus, it is clear that the basis of reopening of the assessment is the seized material found during the course of search and seizure operation in the case of Rajendra Jain Group and the statement of Shri Madan Mohan Gupta recorded u/s 132(4) and 131 of the Act. The Assessing Officer analyzed the statement and the seized material for his satisfaction as recorded in paras 4 and 5 of the assessment order as under:- "4. In his statements, recorded during the course of search/post search proceedings, Shri Madan Mohan Gupta submitted that the following ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eized in the search and seizure operation in case of Rajendra Jain Group. Accordingly, the AO proceeded to reassess the income of the assessee u/s 147 of the Act. The entire decisions of the AO to reassess the income of the assessee is based on the seized material and statement of Shri Madan Mohan Gupta recorded u/s 132(4) of the Act for which the specific remedy is provided u/s 153C of the Act. For ready reference we quote section 153C as under:- " 153C. ^79[(1)] ^80[Notwithstanding anything contained in section 139, section 147, section 148, section 149, section 151 and section 153, where the Assessing Officer is satisfied that,- (a) any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing, seized or requisitioned, ^81belongs to; or (b) any books of account or documents, seized or requisitioned, pertains or pertain to, or any information contained therein, relates to, a person other than the person referred to in section 153A, then, the books of account or documents or assets, seized or requisitioned shall be handed over to the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction over such other person] ^82[and that Assessing Officer shall proceed aga....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd limitation of serving the notice under sub-section (2) of section 143 has expired, or (c) assessment or reassessment, if any, has been made, before the date of receiving the books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned by the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction over such other person, such Assessing Officer shall issue the notice and assess or reassess total income of such other person of such assessment year in the manner provided in section 153A." This section begins with non-obstante clause and therefore, has an overriding effect on the Sections 147&148 of the Act. As per the scheme and object of Section 153C r.w.s 153A the AO has no discretion or choice to invoke the provisions of Section 147/148 instead of section 153C r.w.s. 153A of the Act. Once the case of reassessment is made out by the AO which falls in the preview of specific provisions of section 153C of the Act, the AO cannot resort to invoke the provisions of Section 147/148 of the Act to assessee or reassess income of the assessee. The action of the AO to initiate the proceedings Under section 147/148 of the Act vitiates the entire reassessment proceedings and the assessment ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... provisions of s. 153A." 8. On a perusal of the above provisions, it would be clear that the provisions of s. 153C of the Act were applicable, which supersedes the applicability of provisions of ss. 147 and 148 of the Act. As we have already noted hereinabove that the documents were seized during the search under s. 132 of the Act and the same were sent to the assessee's AO at Amritsar by the officer at Delhi in our view, the learned CIT(A) has correctly observed that only the provision in which any assessment could be made against the assessee in the IT Act was s. 153C r/w s. 153A of the Act. It is also apparent from the record that the officer at Delhi has mentioned in his letter that the necessary action may be taken as per law under s. 153C/148 of the Act. Hence, notice issued under s. 148 of the Act and proceedings under s. 147 of the Act by the AO are illegal and void ab initio. In view of the provisions of s. 153C of the Act, s. 147/148 stands ousted. In the instant case, the procedure laid down under s. 153C has not been followed by the AO and, therefore, assessment has become invalid. We also observe that the CIT(A) was justified in following the ratio laid do....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e of Block period consisting of 10 assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year in which search took place and the broken period of up to the date of search was also included in the block period. After the introduction of new sections, i.e. section 153A to 153C, the single block assessment concept was done way with the new scheme of assessment of search cases where the Assessing Officer is to assess or reassess the total income of each of the assessment years falling within the period of six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year in which the search is conducted. Therefore, under the new scheme, the Assessing Officer is required to exercise the normal assessment powers in respect of the previous year in which the search took place. From these facts, one thing is clearly emerged that both i.e. earlier concept of Block assessment and the new scheme of assessment is separate provisions created for assessment of search cases where the search is conducted u/s 132 or requisition was made u/s 132A of the Act. 12. Under the provisions of section 147, the Assessing Officer is having power to re-open the assessment, if he is of the opinion that the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Assessing Officer is empowered to reopen those proceedings and reassess the total income taking note of the undisclosed income, if any, found during the course of search. For this purpose, the restrictions imposed on the Assessing Officer by way of sections 148 to 153 to reopen the assessment u/s 147 has been removed by the non abstante clause used in section 153A. 14. In the present case on hand, admittedly, the Assessing Officer has reopened the assessment based on a search conducted in a third party case. The AO formed the opinion based on the statement recorded from the assessee, consequent to post search proceedings taken up by the DDIT(Inv), which shows undisclosed income which is the very basis of reopening the assessment. The search is conducted on 22-8-2008 which comes under the assessment year 2009-10. The Assessing Officer reopened the assessment year 2008-09, which is falling within those six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year in which search is conducted. The assessee case falls within the provisions of section 153C, as the incriminating document seized in the case of search in another case. The Assessing Officer, on satisfying the abo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....3 taxmann.com 103 (Mum) (SB). The Special Bench after considering the provisions of section 153A and CBDT circular has held as under: '52. The provision comes into operation if a search or requisition is initiated after 31.5.2003. On satisfaction of this condition, the AO is under obligation to issue notice to the person requiring him to furnish the return of income of six years immediately preceding the year of search. The word used is "shall" and, thus, there is no option but to issue such a notice. Thereafter he has to assess or reassess total income of these six years. In this respect also, the word used is "shall" and, therefore, the AO has no option but to asses or reassess the total income of these six years. The pending proceedings shall abate. This means that out of six years, if any assessment or reassessment is pending on the date of initiation of the search, it shall abate. In other words pending proceedings will not be proceeded with thereafter. The assessment has now to be made u/s 153A (1)(b) and the first proviso. It also means that only one assessment will be made under the aforesaid provisions as the two proceedings i.e. assessment or reassessment pro....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ith a non obstante clause relating to normal assessment procedure which is covered by Sections 139, 147, 148, 149, 151 and 153 in respect of searches made after 31.5.2003. These Sections, the applicability of which has been excluded, relate to returns, assessment and reassessment provisions. Prior to, the introduction of these three Sections, there was Chapter XIV- B of the Act which took care of the assessment to be made in cases of search and seizure. Such an assessment was popularly known as block assessment because the Chapter provided for a single assessment to be made in respect of a period of a block of ten assessment years prior to the assessment year in which the search was made. In addition to these ten assessment years, the broken period up to the date on which the search was conducted was also included in what was known as block period. Though a single assessment order was to be passed, the undisclosed income was to be assessed in the different assessment years to which it related. But all this had to be made in a single assessment order. The block assessment so made was independent of and in addition to the normal assessment proceedings as clarified by the Explanation ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o the initiation of the search/requisition, the Assessing Officer is empowered to reopen those proceedings and reassess the total income, taking note of the undisclosed income, if any, unearthed during the search. For this purpose, the fetters imposed upon the Assessing Officer by the strict procedure to assume jurisdiction to reopen the assessment under Sections 147 and 148, have been removed by the non obstante clause with which sub section (1) of Section 153A opens. The time-limit within which the notice under Section 148 can be issued, as provided in Section 149 has also been made inapplicable by the non obstante clause. Section 151 which requires sanction to be obtained by the Assessing Officer by issue of notice to reopen the assessment under Section 148 has also been excluded in a case covered by Section 153A. The time-limit prescribed for completion of an assessment or reassessment by Section 153 has also been done away with in a case covered by Section 153A. With all the stops having been pulled out, the Assessing Officer under Section 153A has been entrusted with the duty of bringing to tax the total income of an assessee whose case is covered by Section 153A, by even mak....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....this latter situation, the Assessing Officer will reopen the assessments or reassessments already made (without having the need to follow the strict provisions or complying with the strict conditions of Sections 147, 148 and 151) and determine the total income of the assessee. Such determination in the orders passed under Section 153A would be similar to the orders passed in any reassessment, where the total income determined in the original assessment order and the income that escaped assessment are clubbed together and assessed as the total income. In such a case, to reiterate, there is no question of any abatement of the earlier proceedings for the simple reason that no proceedings for assessment or reassessment were pending since they had already culminated in assessment or reassessment orders when the search was initiated or the requisition was made. 20. Applying the ratio of the above decisions to the facts of the present case, we find that there is no dispute that the original assessment for the A.Y. 2001-02 was completed u/s 143(3) on 13-2-2004 determining the total income at Rs. 26354942360/-. Thereafter, a search and seizure action was initiated in assessee's....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed above especially the decision of Amritsar Bench in the case of ITO vs. Arun Kumar Kapoor (supra), we find that in that case as in the present case before us, reassessment was initiated on the basis of incriminating material found in search of third party and the validity of the same was challenged by the assessee before the Learned CIT(Appeals) and the Learned CIT(Appeals) vitiated the proceedings. The same was questioned by the Revenue before the ITAT and the ITAT after discussing the cases of the parties and the relevant provisions in details has come to the conclusion that in the above situation, provisions of sec. 153C were applicable which excludes the application of sections 147 and 148 of the Act. The ITAT held the notice issued under sec. 148 and proceedings under sec. 147 as illegal and void ab initio. It was held that Assessing Officer having not followed procedure under sec. 153C, reassessment order was rightly quashed by the Learned CIT(Appeals). In the present case before us, it is an admitted fact, as also evident from the reasons recorded and the assessment order that the initiation of reopening proceedings was made by the Assessing Officer on the basis of informa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ll the facts necessary for the assessment. The AO while completing the initial assessment on 31.03.2013 Under section 143(3) r.w.s. 153A accepted the transaction of purchase of 8000 shares of M/s Kalyan Buildmart Pvt. Ltd. from Shri Madan Mohan Gupta and his wife Smt. Shashi kala Gupta. When the transaction of purchase of shares was disclosed by the assessee and accepted by the AO in the post search assessment framed u/s 153A then even if the purchase consideration is subsequently found to be incorrect or under stated it does not give jurisdiction to AO to resort to the provisions of section 147/148 of the Act after expiry of 4 years from the end of the assessment year. Further, reassessment proceedings were initiated by the AO on the premise that the assessee has not disclosed the purchase consider of the alleged land, however, it is pertinent to note that the assessee did not purchase any land as it remained with M/s Shri Kalyan Buildmart Pvt. Ltd. and there is no change of the ownership of the said land as belong to M/s Kalyan Buildmart Pvt. Ltd. We find that there is no transaction of sale and purchase of land in question between the assessee and Shri Madan Mohan Gupta. What wa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eassessment cannot be faulted as the same was based on information derived from the tax audit report. The tax audit report had already been submitted by the assessee. It is one thing to say that the Assessing Officer had received information from an audit report which was not before the Income- tax Officer, but it is another thing to say that such information can be derived by the material which had been supplied by the assessee himself. We also cannot accept the submission of Mr. Jolly to the effect that only because in the assessment order, detailed reasons have not been recorded an analysis of the materials on the record by itself may justify the Assessing Officer to initiate a proceeding under section 147 of the Act. The said submission is fallacious. An order of assessment can be passed either in terms of sub-section (1) of section 143 or sub-section (3) of section 143. When a regular order of assessment is passed in terms of the said sub-section (3) of section 143 a presumption can be raised that such an order has been passed on application of mind. It is well known that a presumption can also be raised to the effect that in terms of clause (e) of section 114 of the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ended on behalf of the Department, then, in the garb of reopening the assessment, review would take place. One must treat the concept of "change of opinion" as an in-built test to check abuse of power by the Assessing Officer. Hence, after 1st April, 1989, the Assessing Officer has power to reopen, provided there is "tangible material" to come to the conclusion that there is escapement of income from assessment. Reasons must have a live link with the formation of the belief. Our view gets support from the changes made to section 147 of the Act, as quoted hereinabove. Under the Direct Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1987, Parliament not only deleted the words "reason to believe" but also inserted the word "opinion" in section 147 of the Act. However, on receipt of representations from the companies against omission of the words "reason to believe", Parliament reintroduced the said expression and deleted the word "opinion" on the ground that it would vest arbitrary powers in the Assessing Officer. We quote hereinbelow the relevant portion of Circular No. 549 dated October 31, 1989 ([1990] 182 ITR (St.) 1,29), which reads as follows : "7.2 Amendment made by the Amending Act, 1989, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ported in Fenner (India) Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax [2000] 241 ITR 672 (Mad), wherein, it was observed as follows: "The pre-condition for the exercise of the power under section 147 in cases where power is exercised within a period of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year is the belief reasonably entertained by the Assessing Officer that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for that assessment year. However, when the power is invoked after the expiry of the period of four years from the end of the assessment year, a further pre-condition for such exercise is imposed by the proviso namely, that there has been a failure on the part of the assessee to make a return under section 139 or in response to a notice issued under section 142 or section 148 or failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for his assessment for that assessment year. Unless, the condition in the proviso is satisfied, the Assessing Officer does not acquire jurisdiction to initiate any proceeding under section 147 of the Act after the expiry of four years from the end of the assessment year. Thus, in cases wher....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the Assessing Officer in understanding the details placed before him cannot confer a justification for reopening the assessment, long after the period of four years had expired. On the facts of this case, it is clear that the escapement of income, if any, on this account is not on account of any failure on the assessee's part to disclose the material facts fully and truly. The notice issued by the Assessing Officer in exercise of his power under section 147, therefore, cannot be sustained. As the error here is one of jurisdiction it is not necessary for the assessee to have recourse to the remedies by way of appeal, revision, etc. It is well settled that when a jurisdictional error is brought to the notice of this court such errors are capable of being corrected by this court in exercise of the court's powers under article 226 of the Constitution of India. The Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Progressive Engineering [1993] 200 ITR 231 (sic), held that when all the relevant facts were before the court and the law is clear on the subject, it is the duty of the High Court to interfere. That was also a case where the proceedings were sought to be initiated against....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....riod of 4 years was without jurisdiction and is not sustainable. Hon'ble Bombay High Court in case of Sitara Diamond (P.) Ltd. vs. DCIT (supra) while considering the validity of notice issue u/s 148 after 4 years has held in para 6 as under:- "6. We have considered the rival submissions. By the impugned notice dated 20 June 2011, the assessment for Assessment Year 2005-06 is sought to be reopened beyond a period of four years of the end of the relevant assessment year. The condition precedent to the exercise of the jurisdiction to reopen an assessment beyond a period of four years as spelt out in the proviso to Section 147 is that there ought to be a failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment for that assessment year. In the present case, the sole basis on which the assessment proceedings were sought to be reopened is the order which has been passed on 5 July 2011 for Assessment Year 2007-08. In that order, according to the Revenue, it has been held that the assessee acts as a mere facilitator and is not a manufacturer so as to entitle it to the deduction under Section 10A. The issue, however, before the Cour....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... identical to the case of Shri Navrattan Kothari in ITA No. 425/JP/2017 dated 13.12.2017 wherein under identical set of facts the entire reassessment proceedings were quashed by the Tribunal. Further the Assessing Officer has proceeded in the case of assessee as well as in the case of Shri Shankar Lal Saini and Shri Kanhiya Lal Saini on the premises that the assessee alongwith his two sons have purchased the land in question by paying on money as found recorded in the seized material, which was explained by Shri Madan Mohan Gupta. However, no tangible material is placed on record to support the action of the AO warranting reopening of the assessee's case. The AO did not rebut the appellant's contention that nothing over and above the amount recorded in the registered sale deeds was paid by bringing necessary details. The unsubstantiated material found in the diary in possession of Shri Madan Mohan Gupta cannot be considered in the hands of the assessee as a conclusive evidence so as to reopen the assessment and make additions towards unexplained investment in purchase of land. Undisputedly, no other material suggesting payment of higher amounts was recovered during the search. It i....