Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2019 (6) TMI 1200

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t, but the basis for passing aforesaid order was also DVO s report, wherein the Assessing Officer had made reference to valuation of asset during the course of assessment proceedings, but no such valuation report was received and on a later date, order of revision was passed by Commissioner. Applying the ratio laid down in ACIT Vs. Dhariya Construction Company [ 2010 (2) TMI 612 - SC ORDER] we hold that reasons recorded for reopening the assessment cannot stand as the Assessing Officer had failed to apply his mind to the information collected, if any, and has failed to form a belief vis- -vis reasons recorded for the relevant assessment years. re-assessment proceedings initiated in the case of assessee are without any basis and the consequent order passed under section 16(3) r.w.s. 17(1) of the Act do not stand - Decided in favour of assessee. - WTA Nos.39 to 44/PUN/2019 - - - Dated:- 24-6-2019 - Ms. Sushma Chowla, JM And Shri Anil Chaturvedi, AM For the Assessee : Smt. Deepa Khare For the Revenue : Shri S.B. Prasad ORDER PER SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM: This bunch of appeals filed by assessee .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ing for reasons recorded for reopening the assessment. The said point has been confirmed by Assessing Officer vide his report dated 15.05.2019. 6. The CIT(A) also decided the issue on merits of the case and not on jurisdictional issue. 7. The assessee is in appeal before us and has raised the aforesaid issue and has pointed out that reasons recorded for reopening the assessment were not provided to assessee, though request for the same was made before the CIT(A). 8. During the course of hearing, the learned Authorized Representative for the assessee drew our attention to reasons recorded for reopening the assessment for assessment year 2005-06, copy of which is placed at page 4 of Paper Book. The learned Authorized Representative for the assessee on one of the dates of hearing pointed out that though initially no reasons recorded for reopening were supplied to the assessee, but the same have now been supplied and consequently she sought time to file the Paper Book. It was pointed out by her that the basis for reopening the assessment is the order passed under section 25(2) of the Act passed by CIT-II, Pune, dated 23.03.2007 in which the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ereafter, issue notice under section 18 of the Act. The jurisdiction can be invoked in case of escapement of wealth and not in any other case. 11. Now, coming to the facts of present case, admittedly the assessee had not furnished return of wealth for the instant assessment year. The Assessing Officer after receipt of order passed under section 25(2) of the Act by the CIT-II, Pune dated 23.03.2007 had recorded reasons for issuing notice under section 17(1) of the Act. The said reasons are undated, copy of said reasons are placed in Paper Book for the respective years before us and all of them are similarly worded except for the instant assessment year and the same read as under:- Reasons for issuing of notice U/s 17(1) of the W T Act, 1957. The assessee is having immovable property as on valuation date 31.03.2001 as under: It is seen from the record and order U/s 25(2) passed by the CIT-II Pune on 23.03.2007 and determined the value of plot situated at S. No.16/1 Vadgaon Sheri of ₹ 16,33,78,866/- as per the district Valuation Officer as on 31.03.2001 by adopting the land rates @ 260/- Per Sq. Ft. Considering th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ter dated 29.03.2012 and the said permission was granted on 30.03.2012. The said communications are placed at pages 10 and 11 of Paper Book. Admittedly, the assessee had not sought reasons recorded for reopening the assessment before the Assessing Officer. However, before the CIT(A), he had filed letter dated 15.05.2017, copy of which is placed at pages 1 to 3 of Paper Book, in which he had sought reasons recorded for reopening the assessment. The learned Authorized Representative for the assessee pointed out that during pendency of appellate proceedings i.e. after completion of assessment proceedings, the assessee had sought copies of said reasons recorded from the Wealth Tax Officer vide different communications. The first letter was dated 08.02.2016, then 02.03.2016, 04.05.2016, 12.07.2016, 10.08.2016 and 27.10.2016. On the said date i.e. 27.10.2016, even the Commissioner of Wealth Tax was intimated that assessee had sought copies of reasons which have not been received from the DCWT. The said reasons have been supplied to assessee during the course of present hearing before Tribunal. After receipt of reasons recorded for reopening the assessment, assessee furnished revised grou .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... on 17(1) of the Act. In any case, in the reasons recorded reference is made to valuation as on 31.03.2001, whereas the DVO had valued the property upto 31.03.2003. The Assessing Officer has not applied the last valuation completed in the case of assessee i.e. on 31.03.2003 at ₹ 26.35 crores, but has referred to DVO s value as on 31.03.2001 at ₹ 16.33 crores, being the basis for reopening the assessment. We find no merit in the exercise of jurisdiction by Assessing Officer in this regard. It cannot be said that reopening of assessment in the hands of assessee is not based on DVO s report. Though reference is made to order of Commissioner under section 25(2) of the Act, but the basis for passing aforesaid order was also DVO s report, wherein the Assessing Officer had made reference to valuation of asset during the course of assessment proceedings, but no such valuation report was received and on a later date, order of revision was passed by Commissioner. It may also be mentioned that instead of basing the reopening, if any in the case of assessee on the last valuation date i.e. 31.03.2003, arbitrarily the figure as on 31.03.2001 has been taken for recording reasons for re .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates