TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 1376X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rial collected by the Assessing Officer after the assessment under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Act was framed, and therefore, the impugned reopening is nothing but change of opinion by the successor Assessing Officer - Decided in favour of assessee. - Special Civil Application No. 13995, 13997 of 2016 - - - Dated:- 28-12-2016 - M. R. Shah And B. N. Karia, JJ. Mr SN Divatia, Advocate for the Petitioner Mrs Mauna M Bhatt, Advocate for the Respondent JUDGMENT ( Per : Honourable Mr. Justice M. R. Shah ) [1.0] As common question of law and facts arise in both these petitions, they are heard, decided and disposed of together by this common judgment and order. [1.1] Special Civil Application No.13995/20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... petitioner declared his share of capital gains at ₹ 4,67,541/- in the revised return as against ₹ 3,00,544/- shown in the original return. The petitioner assessee also claimed cost of improvement incurred in respect of the said land by his father and the co-owner in different years. The said return of income was accepted under Section 143(1) of the Act but later on notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued on 20/01/2014. The Assessing Officer then completed regular assessment under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Act after calling for detailed scrutiny of documents, papers etc. from time to time. It appears that notice under Section 142(1) of the Act dated 28/02/2014 was issued by the Assessing Officer. The A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cording reasons under Section 147 notice under Section 148 was issued on 20/01/2014. The assessment order under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 was completed on 14/03/2014 determining the total income of ₹ 6,06,740/-. The scrutiny of the records revealed that the assessee has submitted the copies of bills, vouchers etc. for cost of improvement on which no details like bill no., mode of payment etc. were not given. Most of the invoices are printed on simple paper on computer. It was also noticed that in the case of bills for the year 1994-95 the PAN was quoted. It is to mention here that the PAN was not in existence in the year 1994-95. There was only GIR No. Further, assessee has not submitted any bank statement to prove th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nder Section 148 of the Act to reopen the assessment for the Assessment Year 2011-12 is absolutely bad in law, which cannot be sustained. [3.2] It is vehemently submitted by Shri S.N. Divetia, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner assessee that the assessment for the Assessment Year 2011- 12 is sought to be reopened by the Assessing Officer by doubting the expenses incurred earlier and now by doubting the long term capital gain claimed by the petitioner assessee. It is submitted that however the entire question with respect to long term capital gain was earlier gone into in detail by the Assessing Officer while framing the regular assessment under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Act, which was done after ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... elying upon the above decisions, it is requested to allow the present petitions. [4.0] Ms. Mauna Bhatt, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the revenue has tried to oppose the present petitions. It is submitted that the Assessing Officer while issuing the impugned notices and while reopening the assessment for the Assessment Year 2011-12 has as such considered the material on record such as copies of the bills, vouchers etc for cost of improvement and has doubted the genuineness of the same, and therefore, the Assessing Officer is justified in reopening the assessment. It is submitted that the reopening of the assessment is within the period of four years. It is submitted that therefore in the facts and circumstances of the case, it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion 147 of the Act and it appears that addition of ₹ 1,66,997/- was made to the total income of the petitioner assessee towards long term capital gain. Thereafter, again reassessment proceedings have been initiated on the very ground doubting the genuineness of the bills, vouchers etc. for cost of improvement and doubting the long term capital gain claimed by the petitioner assessee. It does not appear that there is any further material collected by the Assessing Officer after the assessment under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Act was framed, and therefore, the impugned reopening is nothing but change of opinion by the successor Assessing Officer, which as per the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court as well as thi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
