2025 (6) TMI 395
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... circumstances of the case, the learned CIT (Appeals) has erred in law in upholding the validity of proceedings u/s 147 read with section 148 of the Act, ignoring the fact that the reasons recorded for issue of notice under section 148 of the Act are without making any allegation that the appellant has failed to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for the assessment as per proviso to section 147 of the Act. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT (Appeals) has erred in law in upholding the validity of the order passed by the Ld. AO u/s 147 of the Act is bad and liable to be quashed as the same is based on the reasons which are vague, without bringing any fresh material or evidence, and done on the basis of change of opinion, which amounts to review of order, not permissible under the law. 4. On facts and circumstances of the case, the Additions of Rs. 16,66,300/- cannot be made on other grounds, if the primary ground on which the proceeding u/s 147 were initiated, cease to survive. 5. On facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT (Appeals) has erred in law in upholding the addition of Rs. 16,66,300/- made u/s 56 of the Act on....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....there is no external information emanating out of records so as to reopen after 4 years. The AO has reopened the case upon perusal of the financial statement of the assessee which was very much before him at the time of completing the original assessment under Section 143(3). In this regard we consider it relevant to refer to the decision of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT v. Usha International Ltd. (ITA No. 2026/2010 dated 19th July, 2012) "16. Frankly, I am unable to see any difference between a case where a query is raised by the assessing officer which is replied to by the assessee with supporting evidence or material, but the opinion of the assessing officer on the assessee's reply is not recorded in the ITA 2026/2010 (FB) Page 40 of 48 assessment order, and a case where even without a query from the assessing officer, the assessee voluntarily discloses full and true particulars necessary for his assessment, which are not referred to in the assessment order and the opinion of the assessing officer has not been expressly recorded therein. The distinction which was sought to be made on behalf of the revenue between the two types of cases was that ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....anner. The ratio of the judgment is rooted to the salutary principle that the assessee's shall not be subjected to harassment if they have furnished full and true particulars at the time of the original assessment, which is what the Supreme Court observed in the judgment in Srikrishna Pvt. Ltd. (supra). It certainly does not imply that every assessment order passed under section 143 (3) without an elaborate discussion of various contentions and claims put forth by the assessee is necessarily a wrong order to be corrected later by resorting to section 147. Making an assessment to income tax represents the quantification of the charge to tax; it is a serious task. Legal consequences follow. A return of income is not a mere scrap of paper. It is to be treated with the respect it deserves. I think the real principle laid down by the Full Bench in Kelvinator (supra) is that if the ITA 2026/2010 (FB) Page 42 of 48 assessee has discharged his duty of furnishing full and true particulars at the time of the assessment, it may be fairly taken that the assessing officer has equally discharged his functions in the manner required of him. If he passes an assessment order under section 143(3) of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o argue or hold that when the assessing officer fails to examine a subject matter, entry, claim or deduction, he forms no opinion, notwithstanding that the assessee had made a full and true disclosure and notwithstanding that the assessment was completed under section 143 (3) and to further hold that it would be a case of "no opinion", would be to fly in the teeth of the two rulings. It is not even open to the revenue to urge such a proposition. 19. I must now refer to the judgment of the Supreme Court in A.L.A Firm Vs. CIT (1991) 189 ITR 285, wherein the provisions of section 147(b) of the Act as they stood before 01.04.1989 were being examined. That case was predominantly concerned with the question as to what would constitute "information" within the meaning of section 147(b). It was held that the statute does not require that the ITA 2026/2010 (FB) Page 44 of 48 information must be extraneous to the record and that it is sufficient that if the material, on the basis of which the assessment is sought to be reopened, came to the notice of the assessing officer subsequent to the original assessment and that such material may come to the notice of the assessing officer from the r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o his notice. When he subsequently became aware of the decision, he initiated proceedings under section 147(b). The material which constituted information and on the basis of which the assessment was reopened was the decision in G.R. Ramachari and Co. [1961] 41 ITR 142 (Mad). This material was not considered at the time of the original assessment. Though it was a decision of 1961 and the Income-tax Officer could have known of it had he been diligent, the obvious fact is that he was not aware of the existence of that decision then and, when he came to know about it, he rightly initiated proceedings for reassessment. We may point out that the position here is more favourable to the Revenue than that which prevailed in the Madras cases referred to earlier. There, what the Income-tax Officer had missed earlier was the true purport of the relevant statutory provisions. It seems somewhat difficult to believe that the Income-tax Officer could have failed to read properly the statutory provisions applicable directly to the facts before him (though that is what seems to have happened). Perhaps, an equally plausible view on the facts could have been taken that he had considered them and de....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nion", I have nothing to add to the draft proposed. As to the first part of the second question my answer would be that the assessment proceedings cannot be validly reopened under section 147 of the Act even within four years, if an assessee has furnished full and true particulars at the time of original assessment with reference to the income alleged to have escaped assessment, if the original assessment was made u/s 143(3). My answer to the second part of the second question is that the issue is concluded by the judgment of the Full Bench of this court in Kelvinator (supra). 24. My answer to the third question is this. So long as the assessee has furnished full and true particulars at the time of original assessment and so long as the assessment order is framed under section 143(3) of the Act, it matters little that the assessing officer did not ask any question or query with respect to one entry or note but had raised queries and questions on other aspects. Again the answer to this question stands concluded by the judgment of the Full Bench of this court in Kelvinator (supra). My answer to question No.(iv), in respectful agreement with the judgment of the Full Bench of this co....