2023 (5) TMI 791 - AT - Income Tax

Reopening of assessment u/s 147 - period of limitation - return was already scrutinized u/s 143(3) and the reopening exercise has been undertaken beyond 4 years - LTCG undisclosed - HELD THAT:- As one of the essential requirements is that there should be failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for her assessment for impugned assessment year. During the course of original assessment proceedings, AO, vide notice required the assessee to file purchase and sale deed of Kanathur property. The same was duly furnished by the assessee along with computation of Long-Term Capital Gains.

The other details as called for by Ld. AO were also furnished by the assessee - Considering the same, the assessment was framed on the assessee making certain additions. Thus, it was a case wherein there was no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose material facts necessary for her assessment. Therefore, applying the case of Foramer France [2003 (1) TMI 101 - SC ORDER] it was to be held that notice issued u/s 148 was barred by limitation and consequential assessment framed by Ld. AO would be nullity.

The decision of Pr. CIT vs. S. Chand & Co. Ltd.[2018 (11) TMI 1067 - SC ORDER]also supports the proposition that reassessment proceedings merely at the behest of audit objection as based on mere appraisal of the same record without any tangible material or information, would be bad in law. In the present case, we find that there is no independent application of mind by Ld. AO while recording the reasons for reopening. There is no new tangible material to reopen the case. Therefore, the assessment was to be held as bad-in- law. Decided in favour of assessee.