TMI Blog2020 (2) TMI 836X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r different names . This goes to show that reopening is based on the same set of facts which are available with the Assessing Officer at the time of making original assessment. Assessing Officer allowed exemption u/s.54B of the Act after considering the material available on record and took plausible view. Therefore we can safely conclude that reopening of assessment is only based on change of opinion on the same set of facts which are available with the Assessing Officer at the time of framing the original assessment order As relying on M/S. KELVINATOR OF INDIA LIMITED [ 2010 (1) TMI 11 - SUPREME COURT] we hold that reopening the assessment is bad in law. Accordingly, we squash the reassessment proceedings and allow the appeal of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , in any event, ought to have seen that after the order u/s.143(3), the onus rests heavily on the officer to bring on record fresh material that had not been considered earlier, which remains unsubstantiated and hence the reopening of assessment is untenable in law. 6. The CIT(A) erred in confirming the denial of exemption u/s.54B of ₹ 14,00,000 to the assessee. 7. The CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the assessee had reinvested the sale proceeds in agricultural lands and rightly claimed exemption under sec.54B and the denial of the same was incorrect and based only on surmises and conjectures. 8. The CIT(A) further failed to appreciate that the lands disposed off are ancestral in character and hence the reinvestment of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Village. The difference is on account of adoption of lower value of fair market value as on 01.04.1981. Accordingly, the assessment was completed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward I(1), Pondicherry (herein after referred as the Assessing Officer ) vide order dated 07.09.2014. The Assessing Officer allowed exemption under the provisions of Section 54B of the Act of D14,00,000/- as claimed by the assessee. Subsequently, based on the information on record, the Assessing Officer formed an opinion that assessee is not entitled for exemption u/s.54B of the Act. Accordingly, notice u/s.148 of the Act was issued on 07.11.2015. In response to which the assessee submitted that the return of income filed on 07.05.2014 be treated as return in re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ble Supreme Court reported in (2019) 3 TMI 741. 6. On the other hand, the ld. Sr. Departmental Representative placed reliance on the orders of lower authorities. 7. We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The only issue in the present appeal relates to validity of the reopening. From the perusal of the assessment, it is clear that the Assessing Officer recorded a finding that second assessment was based on the same fact of materials available on record. There is no reference to any fresh tangible material brought on record. It is amply clear from the assessment order that the Assessing Officer had made observation subsequently on perusal of the records showed that the assessee had claimed an exemption of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
