Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2014 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (10) TMI 459 - AT - Income TaxReopening of assessment u/s 147 – Change of opinion - Held that:- As decided in Commissioner of Income Tax Versus Kelvinator Of India Limited [2002 (4) TMI 37 - DELHI High Court] - on mere change of opinion of AO cannot be a ground for re-assessment and that amendment of sec. 147 w.e.f. 1.4.89 has not altered the position - there has been excessive loss or depreciation allowance or that there has been under assessment or assessment at a lower rate or for applying other provisions of explanation 2 to sec. 147, it must be on material and it should have nexus for holding such opinion contrary to what has been expressed earlier. Even after the amendment of sec. 147, mere change of opinion does not confirm jurisdiction on the ITO to initiate proceeding for reassessment merely by resorting to explanation 1 to sec. 147 - AO is not justified in reopening the assessment on mere change of opinion - Annexure A1 was considered at the original assessment stage and on that basis, the AO made addition on account of unexplained investment in property in a sum - The AO has referred to the same properties in the original assessment order, which are referred to now in the reasons for reopening of assessment for the year under consideration - The assessee filed explanation and evidences before the AO at original assessment stage explaining the investment in the properties - Whatever addition was made by the AO at original stage on the identical facts have been deleted by the CIT(A) as well as confirmed by the Tribunal. The propriety demands that the AO should not have resorted to proceedings to reopen assessment on identical facts - All facts were all along were within the knowledge of the AO at original assessment stage, therefore, re-appreciation of evidence at subsequent re-assessment proceedings is not permitted on mere change of opinion by subsequent AO - The re-assessment proceedings have been initiated again on similar issue and totally on identical facts regarding investment in property which have already been considered in the original assessment proceedings - It is a case of change of opinion and such a change of opinion for reopening of section 147 is not permitted under law - The AO in the re-assessment order himself has mentioned that addition is made on account of unexplained expenditure/investment in the properties in the original assessment order - No new material or fresh information have been received at the re-assessment stage - it is merely a fresh application of mind by the subsequent AO on the same set of facts - the seized material which was the basis of making some additions at original assessment stage, is the document of the department found during the course of search and once the same has been appreciated and considered by the AO, there is no question on the part of the assessee not to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for hisassessment - The re-appreciation of seized material in subsequent proceedings by the AO is, thus, wholly unjustified particularly when such a seized material was not considered worthy by the CIT(A) in the original appellate proceedings deleting the addition on the same seized material - Therefore, there is no question of re-appreciating the same facts which have been duly considered by the first appellate authority prior to reopening of assessment -CIT(A) on proper appreciation of facts and material on record, rightly quashed the reassessment proceedings – the order of the CIT(A) is upheld in quashing and annulling the reassessment order – Decided against revenue.
|