Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2022 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (9) TMI 339 - AT - Income TaxReopening of assessment u/s 147 - second round of reassessment - Addition towards unsecured loan / unexplained investment - HELD THAT:- Notice u/s.148 was issued in his case qua the investment in land and the AO accepted the genuineness of this transaction without making any addition in his hands. Thus, it becomes evident that the issue, which had attained finality in the first round of the reassessment proceedings with the AO accepting the genuineness and break-up of loan received by the assessee from Dr. A.G. Vakundre, was again sought to be raked up by means of the second round of reassessment. There is no logic in initiating the reassessment proceedings again on the very same basis as constituted the edifice in the first round. The Revenue cannot time and again initiate re-assessment proceedings on the very same issue. Once the proceedings are re-opened, it becomes incumbent upon the AO to give a logical conclusion to such proceedings by examining each and every aspect thereof. Once the genuineness of a transaction is accepted in the first round, the AO is precluded from espousing the same issue once again by means of another round of reassessment. Sword of re-assessment cannot be allowed to hang over the head of the assessee eternally. There has to be an end somewhere, at least of an issue, with the completion of the proceedings in which it was first taken up. We are confronted with a situation in which the AO initiated re-assessment proceedings in the first round on this very issue and passed the order without making any addition by duly recording in the order and accepting the contention of the assessee about having received loan from Dr. A.G. Vakundre with proper details. The re-assessment has been initiated in the second round of proceedings on the same issue, which in our opinion, is totally unfounded. The transactions of acquisition of the land and its payment by Dr. Vakundre are tagged with each other. If the land is the asset of the assessee, then naturally, the corresponding payment is his liability, irrespective of denial by Dr. Vakundre for extraneous considerations. Viewed from any angle, it is patent that the initiation of re-assessment proceedings on this score cannot be validated. We, therefore, overturn the impugned order by quashing the second round of re-assessment proceedings. All the consequential orders passed are hereby set-aside. In view of our decision on the invalidity of the initiation of reassessment proceedings, there is no need to dispose of other grounds raised on merits. - Decided in favour of assessee.
|