2015 (12) TMI 1738 - AT - Income Tax

Reopening of assessment - AO failed to provide it with a copy of the reasons recorded before completion of the order of assessment - Held that - Formation of belief by the AO was a condition precedent as regards the escapement of tax pertaining to the relevant assessment year. Before proceeding to issue the notice under section 147 of the Act the AO was required to form an opinion the validity of which are supposed to sustain the formation of an opinion which can be challenged. Though conclusive evidence is not requisite at the stage of formation of belief it must be based on application of mind which a reasonable person would apply. In our view the reasons recorded as communicated to the assessee by letter dated 04.10.2012 does not remotely evidence independent application of mind as there is clearly no nexus whatsoever between the reasons recorded and the factual findings in the order of assessment. In these circumstances we hold that initiation of proceedings under section 147 of the Act is bad in law Variance in the reasons recorded by the AO as provided to the assessee vide letter dated 04.10.2012 and that recorded in the order of assessment in our view prevented the assessee from putting up any defence in respect of the reopening of assessment under section 147 of the Act. This has clearly violated the principles of natural justice as the AO proceeded on a different premise while finalizing the order of assessment dated 25.03.2013. - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Violation of principles of Natural Justice.
2. Reopening of assessment under section 147 of the Income Tax Act.
3. Addition under section 69 of the Income Tax Act for alleged Accommodation Entries.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Violation of Principles of Natural Justice:
The assessee contended that the CIT(A) failed to address specific grounds related to the violation of natural justice. The CIT(A) did not provide a finding on the grounds raised by the assessee, which included the failure of the Assessing Officer (AO) to provide copies of statements and an opportunity for cross-examination. This failure was argued to be against the principles of natural justice and rendered the assessment order bad in law.

2. Reopening of Assessment under Section 147:
The primary contention was that the AO reopened the assessment without new material or facts, constituting a change of opinion based on a third-party statement. The assessee argued that the reasons for reopening were factually incorrect and lacked application of mind. The AO provided reasons for reopening, citing accommodation entries from M/s. Gold Star Finvest Securities Pvt. Ltd., which were later found to be irrelevant to the assessee's case. The Tribunal found that the reasons recorded by the AO were factually incorrect and had no nexus with the assessee's transactions. This lack of application of mind violated the principles of natural justice, making the reopening of the assessment invalid. Consequently, the Tribunal quashed the notice under section 148 and the resultant order of assessment.

3. Addition under Section 69 for Alleged Accommodation Entries:
The assessee contested the addition of Rs. 29,95,981/- under section 69, arguing that the transactions were supported by evidence and reflected in the balance sheet. The CIT(A) upheld the AO's addition, but the Tribunal did not adjudicate this issue separately, given the quashing of the reopening of assessment.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal held that the initiation of proceedings under section 147 was bad in law due to the lack of application of mind and factual inaccuracies in the reasons recorded by the AO. As a result, the notice under section 148 and the subsequent assessment order were quashed. The Tribunal did not find it necessary to adjudicate other grounds raised by the assessee, given the primary finding on the invalidity of the reopening of assessment. The assessee's appeal was allowed.