TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (6) TMI 1545
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Assessing Officer (AO) under Section 144 r.w. Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) concerning AY 2004-05. 2. In the captioned appeal, the assessee has raised the grounds of appeal reproduced as under. "1 That the Id C.IX(Appeals) has grossly erred both in law and on facts in upholding the reassessment proceedings initiated u/s 147/148 of the IX Act, failing to appreciate that the same were void ab initio and without jurisdiction in as much as no notice u/s 148-of the IX Act had been served upon the assessee till the culmination of assessment proceedings, which is mandatory for assumption of a valid jurisdiction, 1.1 That the reassessment proceedings as initiated by the AO and upheld by the Id C.I.T.(Appeal....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssment Year 2004-05 in question. The return was subjected to scrutiny assessment and the assessment was completed under Section 143(3) of the Act on 16.11.2006 where the income was assessed in negative at a loss of Rs. 7,04,14,520/-. Subsequent to the completion of the assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act, a notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued on 21.07.2010 and the completed assessment under Section 143(3) was thus reopened to include certain income which has allegedly escaped assessment earlier. 4. In the first appeal, the assessee challenged the jurisdiction assumed under Section 147 r.w. Section 148 of the Act and further challenged the disallowance in relation to prior period expenses to the tune of Rs. 19,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....verted to the reasons recorded and submitted that even facially reasons recorded neither meets the conditions of main provisions of Section 147 of the Act nor the 1st proviso thereto as applicable in the instant case where the assessment has been reopened after four years from the end of the Assessment Year and the assessment was earlier made under Section 143(3) of the Act. 8. The ld. DR for the Revenue, on the other hand, relied upon the order of the CIT(A). 9. We have carefully considered the rival submissions. The maintainability of jurisdiction under Section 147 of the Act is central to the controversy in the instant case. On perusal of the reasons recorded under Section 148(2) of the Act qua the alleged escapement as reproduced ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t even cared to allege any kind of failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment. From the reasons recorded, it is not known, what material facts were not brought on record by the assessee in the course of original assessment. The salutary burden placed on the Assessing Officer under the 1st proviso is not discharged at all. The jurisdiction under Section 147 was exercised in a most flippant and nonchalant manner. It is axiomatic that a reopening of completed assessment is special and extra-ordinary and carries civil consequences. Hence, the Assessing Officer is expected to exercise the jurisdiction under Section 147 with scrupulous care. The completed assessment has been reopene....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re is no belief, whatsoever. The Assessing Officer has resorted to section 147 of the Act primarily as an alternative to section 263 or section 154 owing to the admitted fact that the action u/s. 263 cannot be taken due to bar of limitation. Needless to say, the invocation of jurisdiction u/s. 147 is governed by own set of stringent statutory requirement and not alternative of the provisions of section 263 of the Act. The reopening in the instant case is also governed by the embargo placed by first proviso to section 147 of the Act. The completed assessment is a valuable right and cannot be lightly ignored. The Assessing Officer has not even cared to allege any kind of failure on the part of Assessee to disclose fully and truly all material....