Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2023 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (11) TMI 734 - ITAT DELHIReopening of assessment - reopening after a period of four years - assumption of jurisdiction u/s 147 r.w. Section 148 r.w. Section 151 - Original assessment was made u/s 143(3) - HELD THAT:- A perusal of the case record would show that a completed assessment has been reopened on the grounds of purported misuse of National Stock Exchange Platform to obtain contrived loss and siphon out profits earned having regard to the information disseminated by ADIT (Inv.) Ahmedabad. AO has neither incorporated transaction-wise detail in the reasons recorded alleging fictitious losses nor it has been recorded anywhere in the reassessment proceedings. The so called belief formed towards escapement and initiation of vexatious proceedings is apparently without any elementary details. On a reading of reasons recorded, it gives an impression that AO has acted on dotted lines at the dictate of investigation wing without application of mind on the basic and elementary facts. While recording the reasons, AO has not taken cognizance of the fact that assessment has already been framed u/s 143(3) of the Act in the past. Once the assessment has been carried out u/s 143(3) of the Act, the 1st proviso casts exemplary burden on the Revenue to shun embargo of limitation. The onus lies on the Revenue to point out that there is a failure on the part of the assessee to disclose material facts fully and truly indeed. The onus placed by 1st proviso has been clearly overlooked in the instant case. It is apparent that Pr.CIT has also acted perfunctorily while granting approval sought by AO under the shelter of Section 147(b) as pointed out on behalf of the assessee. We have thus no hesitation to hold that the jurisdiction assumed u/s 147 in the instant case suffers from multiple jurisdictional defects and hence such assumption of jurisdiction is outside the legal framework so provided. The action invoked by the AO and Pr.CIT are justiciable the jurisdiction assumed cannot be reactivated beyond the particular stage and after a lapse of time limit. It is evident that notice issued u/s 148 is without jurisdiction and consequent reassessment framed for Assessment Year 2009-10 in question is bad in law and hence quashed. Assessee appeal allowed.
|