Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2017 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (4) TMI 233 - ITAT CHENNAIReopening of assessment - "reason to believe" - sale consideration of property shown lesser than the valuation considered for registration purposes - Held that:- The provisions of the section 50C is applicable. As per Explanation 2 to section 147 it is very clear that due to disclose lower sale consideration by the assessee, the income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment. The assessee has not produced anything before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) to show as to how this fact was fully and truly disclosed before the assessing authority and that there was not failure on the part of the assessee, especially when provisions of the section 50C is applicable. Hence, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) considered the action of the Assessing Officer is fully covered by the provisions of Explanation 1 to section 147. It is possible that with due diligence the Assessing Officer would have ascertained this fact at the time of original assessment also, but in view of the Explanation 1 it does not mean that there was no default on the part of the assessee. Hence, reopening under section 147 is held to be valid. The assessee has tried to take shelter under the exception provided by the above stated proviso where an assessment under sub-section (3) of section 143 has been completed, no action after the expiry of four years from the end of the assessment year can be taken. But as stated above, when the assessee has not disclosed fully and truly the facts necessary for the assessment, this proviso will not come to its rescue. Consequently, we hold that the entire reassessment proceeding in this case is valid and therefore, the action of the Assessing Officer is upheld. The assessee fails on this legal issue. Invoking the provisions of the section 50C - Held that:- The main grievance of assessee is that the assessee made a request the Assessing Officer to refer the valuation issue to the valuation cell under section 50C(2) of the Act, which was not considered by the Assessing Officer. When this was raised before the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), he also rejected it. In our opinion, we find merit in the argument of the learned authorised representative. Before considering valuation under section 50C(1) of the Act, if the assessee requests for reference to Departmental Valuation Officer (DVO), the Assessing Officer shall refer the matter to the Departmental Valuation Officer and he cannot overlook it. Hence, we direct the Assessing Officer to refer the matter to the DVO and thereafter frame the assessment in accordance with law. This ground of assessee is allowed.
|