Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2022 (8) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (8) TMI 1013 - ITAT PATNARevision u/s 263 - reassessment order as erroneous - period of limitation - whether credit entries available in the Bank account of the assessee against the name of the concerns mentioned in the reasons is to be added or not? - HELD THAT:- The assessee has explained that she does not have any credit entry against the names of these companies and, therefore, no addition can be made on the basis of her reply. No addition was made. If no addition was made in a reassessment order on the issue for which it was reopened, then any other addition could not be made. This has been propounded unanimously by three Hon’ble High Courts, i.e. Hon’ble Bombay, Delhi and Gujarat. The Hon’ble High Courts were construing the expression “and also” implied in section 147 to mean that any other income could be added if addition is being made on the item for which assessment was reopened. Therefore, an error under section 263 could be pointed out in the reassessment order on the issue on which it was reopened. If ld. Commissioner was of the view that once the assessment order was reopened then ld. Assessing Officer was required, not only to examine the item for which it was reopened, but any item which exhibits escapement of income and since ld. Assessing Officer failed to examine the other item which in the opinion of ld. Commissioner as escaped income and, therefore, he termed the reassessment order as erroneous is patently contrary to the decision of the Hon’ble three High Courts. Thus the reassessment order cannot be termed erroneous for not examination of other issues than the one it was reopened. As far as original assessment order is concerned, i.e. the order dated 28.12.2016 passed under section 153A/143(3), the action under section 263 is time barred in view of the Hon’ble Supreme Court decision in the case of CIT – vs.- Alagendra Finance Limited [2007 (7) TMI 304 - SUPREME COURT] We are of the view that the impugned order is not sustainable. It is quashed. Assessee appeal allowed.
|