Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2019 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (1) TMI 1616 - AT - Income TaxRevision u/s 263 - reopening of the assessment u/s 148 - second round of proceedings on the same set of facts - assessee received accommodation entry - HELD THAT:- The assessee filed detailed reply before A.O. at the assessment stage along with documentary evidences and the A.O. called for reply from the Investor under section 133(6) of the I.T. Act which has been also responded by the Investor. A.O. on the basis of evidence and material on record, accepted the returned income and thus, accepted that assessee has received genuine share application money. AO, therefore, accepted the returned income vide impugned re-assessment order dated 19.03.2015. A.O. thereafter again recorded the reasons for reopening of the assessment on 23.03.2016. The details of the same have been placed on record by the Ld. CIT-D.R. The assessee has been supplied copy of the reasons vide letter dated 12.05.2016, copy of the reasons for reopening of the assessment. In the same reasons also, the A.O. has referred to the same facts as were recorded in the reasons for reopening of the assessment on 29.03.2014. A.O. has referred to the same letter of the Investigation Wing dated 12.03.2013 and same facts. A.O. after objection by assessee, dropped the second re-assessment proceedings A.O. on the basis of the same information of receiving accommodation entry as noted in the show cause notice u/s 263 had earlier reopened the assessment in first round of proceedings as well as in the second round of proceedings on the same set of facts and ultimately, dropped the second re-assessment proceedings vide Order dated 05.12.2016. Therefore, the first impugned order under section 147 dated 19.03.2015 stood merged with the second reassessment order dated 05.12.2016 dropping the proceedings under section 263 Thus, there were no justification for the Pr. CIT to initiate the proceedings u/s 263 against the first re-assessment order dated 19.03.2015. Pr. CIT did not assume the jurisdiction validly u/s 263 against the second re-assessment order dated 05.12.2016, therefore, the entire proceedings are vitiated and are liable to be quashed. Assessee at the first and second round of reassessment proceedings produced sufficient documentary evidences before A.O. to prove that it has received genuine share application money, therefore, the Ld. Pr. CIT without any justification should not have revised the re-assessment order particularly when no proceedings under section 263 have been initiated against the final assessment order dated 05.12.2016. Assessee rightly contended that when the reasons recorded for reopening of the assessment were the very same reasons for which Ld. Pr. CIT had invoked the jurisdiction under section 263 of the I.T. Act, invocation of Section 263 of the Act is not tenable - Decided in favour of assessee.
|