TMI Blog2017 (2) TMI 854X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , the AO invoking the provisions of section 150(1) and reopening the assessments u/s 147 of the Act for the A.Ys before us is not sustainable. In the case of P.G. and W.Sawoo Pvt Ltd (2016 (4) TMI 1002 - SUPREME COURT) has held that income to be charged to tax must accrue or arise at any point of time during the previous year and it can be said to have accrued or arisen only when a right to receive the amount in question is vested in the assessee. It was held in that case that no such right to receive rent accrued to the assessee at any point of time during the A.Y in question, in as much as enhancement of rent though with retrospective effect, was made only in the year 1994. It was held that notice seeking to reopen the assessment for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... come at ₹ 7,57,106. The original assessment was completed on 16.12.2003 u/s 143(3) determining the taxable income at ₹ 26,14,590 and agricultural income at ₹ 6,57,106. 3. Subsequently, the assessment for the A.Y 2006-07 was completed u/s 143(3) on 23.12.2008 wherein an addition of ₹ 25,69,962 was made on account of interest received. The addition was sustained in first appeal, against which, the assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT. The ITAT Hyderabad, vide its order in ITA No.390/Hyd/2010 dated 8.10.2010, held that only 1/6th of the amount of interest credited in the P L a/c which pertains to the relevant A.Y before it, is to be taxed. It was observed that the balance amount of interest pertaining to other A. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unsel for the assessee submitted that the Tribunal for the A.Y 2006-07, has only held that for the relevant A.Y, i.e. A.Y 2006-07, only 1/6th of the interest is taxable and that the Tribunal never directed that the balance of interest should be brought to tax in the other A.Ys. He submitted that even if it is to be considered that the Tribunal has given such a finding, he submitted that the Tribunal does not have the power to give directions for any other A.Ys not before it. In support of these contentions, the learned Counsel for the assessee has placed reliance upon the following decisions: i) ITAT Hyderabad in ITA No.390/Hyd/2010 for the A.Y 2006-07 dated 8.10.2010. ii) Arbitration Award dated 6.1.2009 iii) Hon'ble Supreme C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d in the books of account . 7. From a literal reading of the above observation of the ITAT, we find that the Tribunal has held that the entire interest has not accrued to the assessee in A.Y 2006-07 but that it pertains to six years and therefore, only 1/6th of the amount can be brought to tax in the relevant A.Y. We do not find any direction to bring the balance of the interest received to tax in the earlier A.Ys. Therefore, the AO invoking the provisions of section 150(1) and reopening the assessments u/s 147 of the Act for the A.Ys before us is not sustainable. The judgments relied upon by the learned Counsel for the assessee also supports this view. In the case of P.G. and W.Sawoo Pvt Ltd (cited Supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Cour ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not be reopened on the basis of the order of the Tribunal, even otherwise the reopening of the assessment for the A.Y 2001-02 by issuance of a notice on 10.06.2011 is bad in law as the limitation for issue u/s 148 had expired in the year 2008 well before the Tribunal had passed the said order in the year. Thus, it can be seen that the Tribunal cannot give a direction for the A.Ys not before it and even if it is so given, that cannot be a reason for reopening of the assessment for the other A.Ys without satisfying the required conditions u/s 148 of the Act. Further, it is also seen that due date for issuance of notice u/s 148 had already expired for all the A.Ys before us, well before 31.03.2010, while the notices issued u/s 148 were dated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
