TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (8) TMI 438
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....date of ld. CIT(Appeals)'s order. Thus we proceed to decide the appeal on merit because the delay has already been explained and condoned. 3. In the first ground of appeal, the assessee has challenged re-opening of assessment by issuance of a notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act. 4. Brief facts as emerging out from the assessment order would reveal that the assessee has filed its return of income on 02.07.2007 in compliance to a notice issued under section 142(1) dated 27.03.2007. Subsequently in order to scrutinize the return, a notice under section 143(2) was issued and served upon the assessee. After verification of the record, ld. Assessing officer has passed the assessment order under section 143(3) on 31.12.2008 at a loss of Rs. 1,73,54,450/-. 5. On account of some internal audit objection, the assessment of the assessee has been reopened by issuance of a notice under section 148 on 26.03.2012. The ld. Assessing Officer did not provide the copies of the reasons to the assessee inspite of prayer of the assessee. Ultimately at the end of the intervention of the Tribunal, copies of such reasons has been supplied not only to the assessee but placed on record. T....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....able to tax on the above reasons has escaped assessment. Accordingly proposal for approval to issue notice U/s 148 of the I T Act is sent to Ld. CIT, Asansol through proper channel". 6. The ld. Counsel for the assessee while impugning the reasons filed a brief note, which reads as under:- "(1) That reasons for re-opening of the case under section 147 was totally baseless. (2) That in the original assessment order passed by Income Tax Officer Ward 3(2) Purulia under section 143(3) did not mention that the loss assessed will be carried forward. A copy of the order of assessment, the assessee also did not claim carry forward of loss in the I. T. Return for the Assessment year 2007-08 and only shown the loss for assessment year 2007-08. A copy of the return is attached. (3) That the ground that If there is loss, no provision for N.P.A could be made is without any basis. The loss shown by the assessee was after taking the provision for bad debts. (4) That co-op. banks are non-scheduled bank and is entitled to make provision for bad debts under proviso to section 36 (VIIa). (5) That in support that a co-op. bank is non schedule bank the ass....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d not re-open u/s 147 after assessment was made under section 143(3) after expiry of four years from assessment year. Here the honorable High court held only permission of Commissioner will not do and assessments can only be re-open after four years only if the escapement of income is happened due to failure on the part of the assessee and can be opened after 4 years of original assessment was completed under section 143(3) to 147. No such fault was pointed put by A.C.I.T. (13) That the above view was well supported by the decision of Allahabad High Court ;in the case of Girdhar Gopal Gualti vs Union of India (2004 Taxman 312. So the re-opening of the case should be set aside". 7. The main emphasize of the ld. Counsel for the assessee was that a scrutiny assessment was passed on 31.12.2008. The notice under section 148 has been issued after expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year. Thus according to the ld. Counsel for the assessee, the assessment could only be re-opened, if Revenue is able to lay its hand on an information which can demonstrate that the assessee failed to disclose all material facts fully and truly while income was scrutinized ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ons of sections 148 to 153, assess or re-assess such income ........... Thus the ld. Assessing Officer must have information in his possession, which has a direct nexus between the formation of belief demonstrating the escapement of income from taxation. The first proviso appended to this section puts an embargo upon the powers of the ld. Assessing Officer. The interdiction provided in this proviso would contemplate that if an assessment order under sub-section 3 of section 143(3) or under section 147 has been made for the relevant assessment year, then no action shall be taken under this section after expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year unless any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for such assessment year by reason of the failure on the part of the assessee to make return under section 139 or in response to a notice under section 142(1) or 148 or to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment for that assessment year. In other words, if an assessee fails to disclose all material facts fully and truly only, then the assessment could be reopened by issuance of a notice under section 148 after the expiry of four yea....