Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2019 (6) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (6) TMI 747 - GUJARAT HIGH COURTReopening of assessment u/s 147 - assessee has failed to disclose the unaccounted cash - Reopening beyond a period of four years - HELD THAT:- In this case, earlier an assessment had been framed u/s 143(3) for assessment year 2011-12. The impugned notice u/s 148 has been issued on 28.3.2018, which is clearly beyond a period of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, and therefore, the first proviso to section 147 would be attracted, consequently, the assessment can be reopened only if there is any failure on the part of the petitioner to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for its assessment for the year under consideration. It would therefore, be necessary to refer to the reasons recorded to ascertain as to whether the AO has recorded any such satisfaction therein. From the facts recorded it is manifest that what is recorded in the reasons for reopening the assessment is contrary to the record of the case, inasmuch as the record clearly shows that amount of ₹ 46,00,000/- has been duly disclosed by the petitioner in the books of account. Therefore, there is no failure on the part of the petitioner to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for its assessment. It follows as a natural corollary that in the absence of any failure on the part of the petitioner to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for its assessment for the assessment year under consideration, the assumption of jurisdiction on the part of the AO beyond a period of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year is invalid and without authority of law. As during the course of scrutiny assessment AO had applied his mind to this very aspect and had called for details from the petitioner in respect of the amount deposited with the Dhule Police Station and after considering the explanation tendered by the petitioner did not make any addition in that regard. Evidently, therefore, the AO seeks to reopen the assessment on a mere change of opinion and hence, even on this count the assumption of jurisdiction on the part of the AO is bad in law. - Decided in favour of assessee.
|