Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2017 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (2) TMI 1107 - ITAT PUNEReopening of assessment - sanction received from the Commissioner - reasons for the notice under section 154 relied upon - Held that:- The first aspect is the date on which the reasons were recorded, which is given in the copy of reasons filed on record, which is dated 04-09-2014, for which the sanction was received from the Administrative Commissioner on 11-08-2014. As is the requirement under section 151 of the Act, the reasons ought to be recorded first for reopening the assessment and thereafter the sanction is to be received from the Commissioner and on receipt of such sanction the notice is to be issued u/s 148. The same has not been followed in this case. The said initiation of reassessment proceedings is incorrect as the same is without the sanction of Administrative Commissioner and hence cannot be upheld. The second aspect is for issuing the said notice under section 148 of the Act. The satisfaction of the Assessing Officer that there is escapement of income in the hands of the assessee is of the Assessing Officer himself and not of any other party as pointed out in the paras hereinabove. The basis for recording the reasons for reopening the assessment is the audit objection raised in the case of assessee. The Assessing Officer while passing assessment order dated 23-03-2015 categorically admits that “however consequent upon audit objections by the internal audit party vide their audit query dated 02-02-2012, the case was reopened u/s 148 after obtaining prior approval of the Commissioner of Income-tax-II, Nashik.” where the initiation of reassessment proceedings are on the basis of audit objection and not on the basis of independent satisfaction of Assessing Officer and hence not valid, is the issue before us. The reassessment proceedings initiated in the case are without any jurisdiction as the Assessing Officer had no occasion to believe that there was escapement of income in the hands of the assessee and hence no merit in recording of reasons for reopening the assessment under section 147 and issue of notice under section 148 of the Act and thereafter completion of assessment under section 143(3) r.w.s.147 of the Act. Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of Berger Paints India Ltd. Vs. ACIT [2009 (8) TMI 557 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] on such issue held that where the reasons quoted for reopening the assessment were practically the same as the reasons for the notice under section 154 of the Act for rectification of the alleged mistakes and where rectification notice had been dropped by the same Assessing Officer, he could not again start reassessment proceedings on the basis of same reasons. - Decided in favour of assessee.
|