TMI Blog2016 (8) TMI 1482X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d apparently on the basis of Audit Memo, which is not permissible. No new tangible material has come to the knowledge of the AO so as to justify the reopening. See M/S. KELVINATOR OF INDIA LIMITED [ 2010 (1) TMI 11 - SUPREME COURT] Hon ble apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Foramer France [ 2003 (1) TMI 101 - SC ORDER] has clearly laid down the principle that where there is no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose material facts, the reassessment proceedings after the expiry of four years is not possible in view of the provisions of Sec. 147 - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No. 179/Mum/2016 - - - Dated:- 11-8-2016 - Shri Mahavir Singh, JM And Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, AM Revenue by: Shri Alok Johari [ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ection 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the assessee asked for the supply of reasons for reopening. The same were supplied by the assessing officer vide its letter dated 29.10.2013 which read as follows: The assessment under section 143(3) of IT act, 1961 was completed on 26.12.2008 assessing income ₹ 6,29,41,275/-against the returned income of ₹ 6,12,47,996/-.It has been observed that the balance sheet as on 31.03.2006 on record, reveal that a credit amount of ₹ 17,73,18,533/- is shown against the account Trade Payable under the head Current Liabilities. The earlier year s balance brought forward under this accounting head is ₹ 80,82,866/-. Therefore, the credit entry during the year under review cou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /production of material on record do not amount to disclosures within the meaning of the Section and he also relied upon various judicial pronouncements to support this contention. Finally, after considering the various replies of the assessee on merits, the reassessment was concluded vide Assessing officer order dated 26.03.2014 wherein total income was reassessed at ₹ 24,83,91,284/- after making additions of Trade Payables and Sundry Creditors. The same was also confirmed by the CIT in first appeal vide order dated 03.11.2015. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before us. 5. The learning Authorized Representative [AR] of the assessee has challenged the reopening on technical grounds and contended that no new ta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssee during original assessment proceedings were duly supplied and it is the duty of AO to call for any further information/documents/confirmation etc. to examine the same and satisfy himself in all respect. 6. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material on record. The assessment year in question is 2006-2007. The original assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of the Act. Reopening notice has been issued under section 148 on 22.03.2013 which is clearly beyond the prescribed period of four years from the end of relevant assessment year. First of all, it would be prudent to reproduce the relevant portion of Section 147 which is as follows:- Provided that where an assessment under sub-section (3) of section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the Balance Sheet. 7. The above facts show that the assessee has disclosed all material facts at relevant places during original assessment proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Act. The AO himself asked for specific questions and full details were supplied by the assessee. AO examined these documents and framed the assessment only after proper application of mind. There was no failure on the part of the assessee to fully and truly disclose all the material facts. Thus, reassessment is being sought by the AO on mere change of opinion and apparently on the basis of Audit Memo, which is not permissible. No new tangible material has come to the knowledge of the AO so as to justify the reopening. The following observation of the Hon ble Ape ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
