TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 2617X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s made. No new tangible material has come to the possession of Assessing Officer to form a belief that income has escaped assessment. It is also pertinent to mention here, in the appeal preferred against the original assessment order, Commissioner (Appeals) has accepted assessee’s claim of exemption under section 11 of the Act. Thus there being no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for its assessment, the re–opening of assessment on a change of opinion, that too, after expiry of four years from the end of relevant assessment year is invalid. - Decided in favour of assessee - ITA no.7375/Mum./2011 - - - Dated:- 30-10-2015 - SHRI RAJENDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erred before the learned Commissioner (Appeals) both on the validity of re opening as well as on the merits of the additions made. 3. Before the first appellate authority, it was submitted, not only the assessee has furnished all material information in the return of income but in the course of the original assessment proceedings also therefore, the re opening of assessment on the very same set of facts and materials which were considered at the time of original assessment and that too after expiry of four years from the end of relevant assessment year, when there is no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully or truly all material facts relating to his assessment, is bad in law. He further submitted, the original assessment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rom any of the activities of the assessee, the same is not taxable as that surplus is utilized for the over all object of trust and not for the benefit of a particular individual. Hence, the AU is not ustilised in reopening the assessment and denying exemption u/s. 11, stating that the trust's activities are such that they contravene the provisions of section 13(1)(c), 13(3) and 11(4A). No such evidence has been mentioned in the reassessment order dated 24.12.2010. The case la' relied upon by the AU are misplaced as they are not on the issue involved. The facts remains that there is no failure on the part of the ass to disclose all the facts necessary for computing of income. The A.O. is not justified in reopening the assessment u/s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... return of income or during the original assessment and on the basis of which the original assessment was made. No new tangible material has come to the possession of Assessing Officer to form a belief that income has escaped assessment. It is also pertinent to mention here, in the appeal preferred against the original assessment order, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has accepted assessee s claim of exemption under section 11 of the Act. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, there being no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for its assessment, the re opening of assessment on a change of opinion, that too, after expiry of four years from the end of relevant assessment year is i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
