TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (9) TMI 92
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... decision of this Court in ACIT Vs. Seshasayye Paper and Board Limited, (2023) 148 taxmann.com 432 (Madras) is not applicable to the facts of the appellant's case especially when neither the notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, nor the reasons for reopening has a finding that the income escaped assessment by the reason of the failure on the part of the appellant to make true and full disclosure of all materials facts necessary and hence the extended period beyond four years is applicable to reopen the assessment? ii. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in not appreciating the fact that the entire reassessment is based on the annual report which was already availa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....llate Tribunal was right in law in stating that the question of change of opinion does not arise especially when the appellant had provided the ledger of foreign exchange during the assessment proceedings and it is not the case that the assessing officer had asked further details and the appellant had failed to provide them? iii. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in not appreciating the fact that the entire reassessment is based on the Annual Report which was already available with the Assessing Officer while framing the assessment under Section 143(3) dated 31.03.2013 and hence there is no fresh tangible material to show that income has escaped assessment? iv. Whether on the fac....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2023] 157 taxmann.com 391 (SC). 7. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondent. 8. In our view, no substantial question of law arises for consideration in this appeal. 9. The Appellate Tribunal is the ultimate fact finding authority and has given a finding that the appellant/assessee has not furnished the information's required for completing the assessment under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and has thus, justified the decision of the Assessing Officer for reopening the assessment. Paragraphs 6.1, 6.2, 6.3, 6.4, 6.5, 6.7 and 7 of the Appellate Tribunal Order clearly bring out the conduct of the appellant/assessee. It reads as follows:- "6.1 The Id. CIT(A) ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssessing Officer, by issuing notice under Section 148 of the Act dated 18.03.2015, reopened the assessment, which is in accordance with law. So far as paper book page 132 is concerned, some details are filed and those are not the details actually required to complete the assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act and not only that, the details filed by the assessee cannot be said that those are the material facts to complete the assessment. Therefore, we are of the opinion that the Assessing Officer has rightly reopened the assessment by issuing notice under Section 148 of the Act. Thus, we hold that the reopening is valid. 6.4 The ld. Counsel for the assessee has also submitted that there is change of opinion and relied on the decision i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as produced two ledger accounts - one for a provision of Rs. 31,57,41,203/- and the other account creating a provision to the extent of Rs. 9,40,62,064/-. The two amounts aggregate to the sum of Rs. 40,98,03,268/-. The assessee has further provided a breakup of the amount in a table. As per the details submitted by the assessee, the Assessing Officer has noted that a provision of Rs. 31.57 Crores has been created for 20 transactions, out of which 4 transactions are in respect of purchases or which there are no forward cover whereas the balance 16 transactions are in respect of purchases for which there is a forward cover. In Mumbai branch, there are in all 4 transactions, all of which are not covered by any forward cover. It was explained b....