Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2021 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (9) TMI 620 - AT - Income TaxValidity of reopening of assessment u/s.148 - Addition u/s 69 - information from DDIT (Investigation) relied upon - reopening within or beyond period of four years - date of reckoning of four years time limit - Whether four years time limit should be reckoned from the end of the relevant assessment year in which original assessment was completed? - HELD THAT:- From the reading of the proviso to Section 147 of the Act it only says where the assessment u/s.143(3) of the Act has been completed, no action shall be taken under this Section after the expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year. The relevant assessment year is A.Y.2006-07. Hence, the four years time limit from said date would expire on 31/03/2011. Since, the notice u/s.148 of the Act in the instant case has been issued on 28/03/2013, the reopening notice has been issued beyond four years from the end of the relevant assessment year. Hence, the first proviso to Section 147 would certainly come into operation in the instant case. Whether there was any failure on the part of the assessee in making full and true disclosure of all material facts before the ld. AO in the original assessment proceedings? - Assessee in response to questionnaire issued by the ld. AO in the original assessment proceedings along with notice u/s.142(1) of the Act dated 14/11/2008, had given a detailed reply vide letter dated 10/12/2008 furnishing the details of additions to fixed assets along with invoices above ₹ 10 lakhs in the prescribed format, as desired by the ld. AO. The ld. AO had verified each and every invoice in the original assessment proceedings and thereafter, concluded that assessee would be entitled for depreciation on fixed assets. This goes to prove that assessee had duly discharged its onus and the same had also been verified and examined by the ld. AO in the original assessment proceedings. While this is so, how can there at all be any failure on the part of the assessee to disclose true and material facts before the ld. AO in the original assessment proceedings. There was no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose the material facts that are material for the purpose of assessment in the original assessment proceedings, by giving full and true disclosure. Addition u/s 69 - As there is absolutely no investment made by the assessee so as to invoke the provisions of Section 69 of the Act. In any case, the allegation of the revenue seems to be that assessee had made purchases of fixed assets from Praj Industries Ltd., by excess value. The entire purchase of fixed assets has already been recorded by the assessee in its books of accounts. The source for making payments for such purchase of fixed assets have also been recorded and disclosed in the same books of accounts. Then, where is the question of applicability of provisions of Section 69 of the Act - The entire investments have been duly explained by the assessee. Hence, there cannot be any addition towards unexplained investment u/s.69 of the Act even on merits. - Decided in favour of assessee.
|