Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2019 (8) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (8) TMI 437 - ITAT LUCKNOWReopening of assessment u/s 147 - Validity of Direction of CIT(A) u/s 150 - period of limitation - limitation of six years provided in section 149 - HELD THAT:- In the present case, the impugned order was passed on May 3, 2019. The assessment year involved is assessment year 2011-12. Thus, in accordance with the provisions of section 149(1)(b) of the Act, notice under section 148 could have issued by the end of assessment year 2018-19. This period had already elapsed when the impugned order came to be passed. Therefore, the law not permitting initiation of proceedings under section 147 when the order under appeal was passed, the direction of CIT(Appeals) is not in accordance with law. It is a nonest direction. It is well-settled that an appellate authority cannot confer jurisdiction which the Assessing Officer does not have, e. g., as in the case of an assessment being barred by limitation. See BENGAL TEA AND FABRICS LIMITED VERSUS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF TAXES [1996 (9) TMI 110 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT] Reopening u/s 147 on direction of superior Officer - As per the provisions of section 147 it is only if the AO has reason to believe that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for any assessment year, that he may assess or reassess such income. Thus, the reason to believe escapement of income has necessarily to be that of the AO only and not of any other authority. In CIT v. SFIL Stock Broking Ltd. [2010 (4) TMI 102 - DELHI HIGH COURT] it has been held, inter alia, that the Assessing Officer cannot reopen a completed assessment merely because he has been directed to do so by a superior Officer. Therefore too, the direction issued by the learned CIT(A) cannot entitle the AO to initiate proceedings under section 147. Grievance of the assessee to be justified, the same is accepted. - Decided in favour of assessee.
|