TMI Blog2020 (5) TMI 91X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ll material facts. In the absence of any such finding in the reasons recorded for reopening the assessment, the assumption of jurisdiction on the part of the Assessing Officer, beyond a period of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, lacked validity. No substantial question of law. Insofar as the finding recorded by the Tribunal that the Assessing Officer could not lay his hands on any new information and has re-appreciated the information already possessed by him and considered it in the scrutiny assessment, as rightly pointed out by the learned senior standing counsel for the appellant, in the light of the provisions of Explanation 1 to section 147 there is no bar against the Assessing Officer on reopening the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not justified and requires to be quashed? [B] Whether the Appellate Tribunal has erred in law and on facts in holding that the question of treating the amount of ₹ 159.46 Cr credited directly to Capital reserve account without crediting to the P L account as cessation of liability u/s 41(1) of the Act, which was not dealt with in the original assessment proceedings does not constitute information within the meaning of Section 147(b) of the Act? 2. The assessment year is 2006-07 and the relevant accounting period is the previous year 2005-06. 3. The assessee filed its return of income on 27.12.2006, declaring total loss of ₹ 137,02,37,406/-. The original assessment proceedings under section 143(3) of the Act had ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was made to Explanation 1 to section 147 of the Act, which provides that production before the Assessing Officer of account books or other evidence from which material evidence could with due diligence have been discovered by the Assessing Officer will not necessarily amount to disclosure within the meaning of the foregoing proviso. It was submitted that therefore, merely because the Assessing Officer has placed reliance upon the record of the case and his belief that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment is not based on any new information, the Tribunal was not justified in holding that the reopening of assessment is not justified. It was, accordingly, urged that the matter requires consideration on the questions as proposed or a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er or remission of the liabilities towards loan is therefore of Capital Receipt and hence Corporation has therefore credited these amounts to Capital Reserve. The details of the principal loan amounts waived by SIDBI and other banks are given in Annexure-B. 8. Thus, it is evident that the issue proposed vide question [B] had been scrutinized at the time of the original scrutiny assessment under section 143(3) of the Act. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer has reopened the assessment to examine the very same issue, which has already been scrutinized at the time of scrutiny assessment. 9. The Tribunal, in the impugned order, has recorded that a perusal of the reasons would reveal that the Assessing Officer nowhere recorded that on ac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ess, a substantial question of law. 10. Insofar as the finding recorded by the Tribunal that the Assessing Officer could not lay his hands on any new information and has re-appreciated the information already possessed by him and considered it in the scrutiny assessment, as rightly pointed out by the learned senior standing counsel for the appellant, in the light of the provisions of Explanation 1 to section 147 of the Act, there is no bar against the Assessing Officer on reopening the assessment on the basis of information contained in the material which was already placed before the Assessing Officer. However, the information has to be such as is contemplated in the Explanation 1 to section 147 of the Act. In the present case, there is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
