TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (3) TMI 2050
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....declaring total income of Rs. 30,833/-. The petitioner had agricultural income of Rs. 21.56 lakhs (rounded off) during the said year which was otherwise exempt from tax. This return was not taken in scrutiny. After the period for issuing notice for scrutiny assessment was over, the Assessing Officer issued a notice on 21.02.2017 under section 133(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for short) and raised certain queries, inter alia, pointing out that the assessee had deposited a sum of Rs. 30.75 lakhs during the period relevant to the said assessment year and that therefore, the assessee to furnish the details and evidences as a proof of the financial transactions, clearly providing the date, mode and source of such investment ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....respect to the return shown in ITR, hence a clarification/verification letter was issued to the assessee to furnish his reply in respect of large cash deposit with supporting evidences. However, assessee had not furnished the details/explanation in his regard till date. Moreover, the deposits made in the said Saving Bank Accounts does not co-relate with the return of income filed by the assessee, hence, it is clear that the assessee has concealed his income to the tune of Rs. 30,75,500/- and failed to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for his assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the Act. In view of the above, the assessee's cash falls within explanation 2(b) to Section 147 of the I.T. Act, i.e. "where a ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....idly that too by two separate Assessing Officers. Jurisdiction of assessment over an assessee is a well-documented procedure. Two Assessing Officers cannot simply claim jurisdiction over the same assessee. 8. Now that the department has abandoned the notice issued by Assessing Officer, Ward No. 3, Vapi, we do not propose to quash the present notice on this ground. On the merits of the notice issued by the Assessing Officer, we may recall, in the reasons, he had stated that the assessee had declared a total income of barely Rs. 30,833/- and agricultural income for the same period was shown at Rs. 21,56,458/-. The amount deposited in the bank account was very large as compared to the return shown by the assessee. Therefore, a letter was issu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on that the Assessing Officer would arbitrarily exercise powers under section 147 of the Act to circumvent the scrutiny proceedings which could not be framed in view of notice under section 143(2) having become time barred, would be taken care of. To reiterate, even for reopening of an assessment which was accepted previously under section 143(1) of the Act without scrutiny, the Assessing Officer should have reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment." 10. The Assessing Officer formed a belief that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment, on the ground that noticing a big mismatch between the returned income and cash transactions in the assessee's bank accounts, queries were raised, which remained un....