Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2019 (7) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (7) TMI 871 - AT - Income TaxReopening of assessment - as alleged non issue of notice u/s 143(2) - HELD THAT:- We are of the view that the AO is not depended upon the assessee to commence assessment proceedings. Once he has given an opportunity to the assessee to submit return in 30 days or in a particular time along with notice u/s 148, and the assessee failed to file return in that time, then he has set the assessment machinery in motion. Thereafter assessee cannot complain that on that return he has not issued notice u/s 143(2). Let us take an example; the assessee did not choose to file return in response to the notice under section 148, and the assessment would be going to be time barred on 31st December; the assessee filed the return on 29th December; can the assessee expect that the AO should have issued notice u/s 143(2) and on his failure the assessment deserves to be quashed. Answer to the above is NO, because the assessment proceeding has to be conducted in accordance with the procedure and not depended upon the mercy of the assessee. Therefore, we do not find any merit in the first fold of contention raised by the assessee. Approval, the JCIT without recording a satisfaction - HELD THAT:- Due procedure has been followed. JCIT has gone through the record and applied his mind, and thereafter granted the approval. There is no merit in the contentions of the ld.counsel for the assessee. Reasons to belief - wrong facts - HELD THAT:- In the present case, no doubt there is an error at the end of the AO while taking cognizance of the fact which goad him to harbor a belief that income has escaped the assessment, and that error is that the assessee has not filed return whereas the assessee has filed the return. Now question is, whether such an error is so fatal that re-assessment is to be quashed ? We have perused the return. The assessee did not disclose the sale transaction of the property and did not offer income under the head “capital gain” on transfer of real-estate. We are of the view that even if the return would have been perused, the opinion would be the same because capital gain has not been shown by the assessee in the return. Therefore, the assessee cannot draw any benefit from any of the judgments cited before us. We do not find any error in the finding of the Revenue authorities, and this appeal is devoid of any merit. It is dismissed. - Appeal of the assessee is dismissed.
|