Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2020 (7) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (7) TMI 458 - AT - Income TaxRe-opening of assessment u/s 147 - re-opening beyond a period of 4 years from the end of the AY - Addition u/s 68 - HELD THAT:- In this case, the assessee has disclosed during the course of original assessment proceedings details of all the loan creditors. The assessee has filed before us a copy of the notice issued u/s 142(1) of the Act dated 12.11.2013 along with the annexure and replies. He has also filed a copy of the unsecured loan account which contains the account of M/s. Rexnox Trexim Pvt. Ltd. The assessee has paid interest on this loan and deducted tax at source. The loan has been repaid within the same year. On these facts, it is wrong on the part of the AO to record at para 7 of his reasons that the assessee has failed to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment. Merely alleging that there is failure to disclose, would not serve the purpose. In this case, a factually wrong allegation has been made that the amount of ₹10 lakhs has not been fully and truly disclosed. Re-opening of assessment on such wrong reasons cannot be upheld. No fresh tangible material has come into the possession of the AO, which could trigger re-opening in this case. The transaction with M/s. Rexnox Trexim Pvt. Ltd. was fully disclosed and it is not fresh material. All the other sentences in the reasons recorded are general and vague and it is not known how these observations are relevant to the assessee company. Re-opening of assessment is bad in law on this ground also. Coming to the merits of the case, the assessee had received ₹10 lakhs in cash through banking channels and he has repaid the same along with interest after deducting tax at source. The details of the company from which the amount was received were filed. Under these circumstances, the question is whether the addition can be made u/s 68 - Assessee has explained the credit in question and as the amount has also been repaid along with interest, the addition in question made u/s 68 of the Act is bad in law. Hence we delete the same. - Decided in favour of assessee.
|