9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2005 (7) TMI 579X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t there was no omission or failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully all material facts necessary for making the assessments, and hence reopening of the assessment under section 147 beyond the period of four years is not in order, and (ii)whether the CIT(A) erred in admitting fresh claim of the assessee for deduction under section 80HHA without allowing a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the Assessing Officer." 3. Brief facts pertaining to the issue before us are as under: One late Sri M.V. Ramachandra Bhat was a sea food exporter. The original assessments for the assessment years 1992-93 and 1993-94 of late Ramachandra Bhat were completed under section 143(3) on 29-11-1994 and 25-11-1994, respectively. In the original assessments the assessee had been granted deductions under sections 80HH and 80-I as under : Asstt. Year 1992-93 1993-94 Deduction u/s 80HH 18,64,480 9,19,837 Deduction u/s 80-I 18,64,484 9,99,837 Deduction u/s 80HHC 23,49,697 - 4. The Assessing Officer noticed that as per section 80HH(9A) if the deduction in relation to the profits and gains of the small scale industrial undertaking, to which section 80HHA is applicable, has been c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 80-I of the Act allowed in the original assessments for both the assessment years framed under section 143(3) of the Act. Being aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee filed appeals to the CIT(Appeals). Before the CIT(Appeals), the assessee raised objections against the impugned order of the Assessing Officer both on procedural as well as on substantive grounds. It was the case of the assessee before the CIT(A) that the reopening of the assessment under section 147 on the facts of the case by the Assessing Officer was without any jurisdiction for both the assessment years as the reassessments were initiated beyond the period of four years from the end of the relevant assessment years. The assessee also challenged the assessment orders on merit also on the ground that the assessee had started the business of processing of fish by making huge investments in the financial year relevant to the assessment year 1988-89 and hence, after considering the totality of the facts the assessee was granted deduction under sections 80HHA and 80-I for the assessment years 1989-90 to 1991-92. The assessee's further contention was that for the assessment year 1992-93 the assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ns 80HHA and 80-I while for the assessment year 1993-94 the appellant has by mistake made the claim under sections 80HH and 80-I. Since the quantum of deductions under sections 80HH and 80HHA is the same, there was no escapement of income when the claim was wrongly typed as 80HH in the assessment year 1993-94. The Assessing Officer had completed the assessments under section 143(3) on 29-11-1994 for both the assessment years 1992-93 and 1993-94 after calling for the clarifications. The fact that the appellant had been granted deduction under section 80HHA for the assessment years up to assessment year 1991-92 is clear from the records. Therefore, there was no failure on the part of the appellant to disclose fully and truly material particulars necessary for the assessment for assessment years 1992-93 and 1993-94. Therefore, the reopening of the assessments beyond the period of 4 years as per the notice under section 148 dated 16-10-2000 for both the assessment years is not in order. Hence, the reassessments for both the assessment years viz., 1992-93 and 1993-94 are cancelled." The CIT (Appeals), thus cancelled the reassessments for both the years. 7. The assessee has filed a pap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ere placed before him for claiming deduction under sections 80HHA and 80-I for the assessment years 1992-93 and 1993-94. He further submitted that there was a typing mistake as far as assessment year 1993-94 is concerned, in that instead of section 80HHA, due to oversight the same was typed as section 80HH. Hence, he submitted that the Assessing Officer had no jurisdiction to reopen the assessments. 9. We have heard the rival submissions of the parties. On the facts of the present case, we have to examine the provisions of section 147. It is undisputed proposition of law that the provisions of section 147 of the Act are machinery provisions. Section 147 of the Income-tax Act is as under : "147. If the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for any assessment year, he may, subject to the provisions of sections 148 to 153, assess or reassess such income and also any other income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment and which comes to his notice subsequently in the course of the proceedings under this section, or recompute the loss or the depreciation allowance or any other allowances, as the case may be, for the as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y perused the order of the CIT(A) and we are of the considered opinion that the CIT(A) has rightly held that initiation of the reassessment proceedings by the Assessing Officer for the assessment years 1992-93 and 1993-94 was beyond the period of limitation as per proviso to section 147. There is no substance in the submission of the ld. DR that there was failure on the part of the assessee to disclose correctly and truly material facts because as far as both the deductions are concerned, the assessee has put forth each and every fact, which were scrutinized by the Assessing Officer at the time of the original assessments framed under section 143(3). Hence, we find no infirmity in the order of the CIT(Appeals) and no interference is called for. Hence, we uphold and confirm the order of the CIT(A). As far as the other issue is concerned, the CIT(A) has cancelled the assessments of the assessee on the issue of legality of the initiation of reassessment proceedings and as we are confirming the order of the CIT(A), the other issue raised by the revenue does not survive. 13. In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed. Order accordingly. 14. CO Nos. 20 & 21/Coch./200 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
