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 1513 - ITAT MUMBAIValidity of Reopening of assessment - as alleged reasons were recorded after issue of the notice - HELD THAT:- Conclusions as drawn by the assessee merely on basis of presumptions and there is no evidence on record, which could support his view that reasons were not recorded on 12/03/2014. Firstly, not mentioning date on the reasons recorded in itself is not sufficient to establish that same was recorded after 12/03/2014. Secondly, it is very much possible that after going through the audit report on date of its filing, the Assessing Officer gone through the said report and recorded the reasons to believe. Thirdly, no evidence duly certified from the authorities are produced before us which could establish that reasons were recorded on 10/03/2014. Merely on the presumption of the assessee, it cannot be held that reasons were recorded after 12/03/2014. Accordingly we reject the contention of the Ld. counsel of the assessee. The ground No. 1 of the appeal is accordingly dismissed. Validity of assessment order passed - whether the return of income filed on 12/08/2014 can be considered as a valid return of income and an assessment made on the basis of said return of income can be considered as valid and legal assessment? - HELD THAT:- We find that the assessee is claiming that return of income filed by the assessee on 11/08/2014 is not valid because it was filed too late after the period of 10 days as specified in notice dated 12/03/2014 issued under section 148 of the Act, and therefore assessment completed under section 143(3) of the Act is invalid. In our opinion, the understanding of the assessee is based on the presumption that return filed by the assessee has been held to be invalid by the Assessing Officer. But from the record, no such action taken by the AO. On the other hand, AO has taken cognizance of the return of income filed by the assessee on 11/08/2014 though with a delay and thereafter issued notice under section 143(2) of the Act on 12/08/2014 and therefore in our opinion the Assessing Officer has validly completed the assessment under section 143(3) of the Act. We do not find any error in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) on this issue in dispute. The ground No. 2, of the appeal is accordingly dismissed. No notice u/s 143(2) was issued after filing of the return of income and therefore assessment completed is void ab initio - As notice u/s 143(2) has been issued after filing return of income and therefore the decisions relied upon by the assessee are of no assistance because in those decisions either no notice u/s 143(2) has been issued and served or same has been issued or served prior to filing of return of income and therefore facts of those cases are distinguishable. As find that in this case on 11/08/2014, the assessee has only submitted a letter that original return of income filed by the assessee might be treated as return of income filed in response to notice under section 148 of the Act. The said original return of income was already available with the AO, and therefore it does not take much time in going through the said return and thereafter issue notice u/s 143(2) - contention of the assessee that even notice issued u/s143(2) on the day of filing of return of income is also invalidate the assessment, is rejected. In view of the above discussion, the ground No. 3 of the appeal is also dismissed. Denial of principle of natural justice - documents in relation to bogus purchases were impounded by the investigation wing of the Income-tax Department & not returned back - From the paperbook filed by the assessee, we find that assessee has filed copy of ledger account in respect of the all alleged bogus purchase parties, copy of stock registers, bank statements etc. and therefore it is evident that same are available with the assessee. In the paperbook, the assessee has also certified that same were produced before the lower authorities therefore contention of the assessee that same were not available with him is ill founded. Further, we find that on the issue of the merit of the addition is concerned, the Tribunal in order dated 20.12.2019 has already allowed relief to the assessee and deleted the addition and therefore in our opinion this issue is rendered only an academic and infructuous. Accordingly, we are not adjudicating upon.
|