TMI Blog2018 (6) TMI 1716X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ich he had before him, income had escaped assessment. Assessing Officer failed to make any exercise for reopening of the case independently and with corroborative material. Even the Assessing Officer has not made any exercise to gather any material evidence on record. The initiation of reassessment itself is based upon no evidence and/or un-corroborative material, therefore in any sense cannot survive, because initiation of the proceeding u/s 147 itself is a vague and based upon no substantive reasoning and/or material at all, hence in our considered opinion, the Ld. CIT(A) was absolutely unjustified in upholding the reopening of the assessment u/s 147 of the Act, without appreciating the facts of the case, explanation submitted and evid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... shape of affidavits of various persons without any corroborative documentary evidence. 3. Whether in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) was right on facts and in law in deleting the addition of ₹ 37,31,000/- on the basis of affidavits of various persons without any corroborative documentary evidence. Where as the assessee has raised the following grounds in Cross Objection. 1. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- 2, Amritsar eared both in law and facts of the case while partly allowing the appeal No. 52/2014-15 vide his learned order dated 03.03.2017. 2. That he was absolutely unjustified in upholding the reopening of assessment under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, misconstruing th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... partly deletion of the Additions and Asseeee also preferred the Cross Objection against the partly confirmation of Addition. 4. At the outset, it was submitted by the Ld. AR that before going through the order on merit, it is essential to go through the reasons recorded in re-opening of the assessment proceedings. The Assessee by way of Cross objections, has raised the legal issue which requires to be addressed first, hence we feel it appropriate to decide the Cross objections, first. 5. Let us to peruse the reasons recorded which are as under: 1. The return filed by the assessee for the A.Y.2009-10 on 02-03-2010 declaring income of ₹ 1,73,470/- was processed u/s 143(1) on 29-12- 2010. There is information in the possession ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ). Provided that where an assessment under subsection (3) of section 143 or this section has been made for the relevant assessment year, no action shall be taken under this section after the expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, unless any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for such assessment year by reason of the failure on the part of the assessee to make a return under section 139 or in response to a notice issued under sub section (1) of section 142 or section 148 or to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for his assessment for that assessment year. Explanation 1.- Production before the assessing officer of account books or other evidence from which material evidence cou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... well settled that the reasons to believe must be bona fide and must be based upon relevant material on which a reasonable person could have form the requisite belief. In the present case, we find that the first sentence of the so-called reasons recorded by the assessing Officer speaks that there is information in the possession of this office . Second Para speaks that I have reasons to belief that an income of ₹ 40,90,100/- along with any other income chargeable to tax, which may subsequently come to the notice during the course of assessment proceedings has escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the I. T. Act, 1961 for the assessment year: 2009-10 due to the reason that the assessee failed to disclose fully and t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l, therefore in any sense cannot survive, because initiation of the proceeding u/s 147 itself is a vague and based upon no substantive reasoning and/or material at all, hence in our considered opinion, the Ld. CIT(A) was absolutely unjustified in upholding the reopening of the assessment u/s 147 of the Act, without appreciating the facts of the case, explanation submitted and evidences places on record judiciously. On the aforesaid observations, we are of the considered opinion that Assessment order itself does not survive on the legal ground itself, consequently the order under challenge i.e. partly confirmation of Assessment Order, of the Ld. CIT(A) is liable to be set aside and in result entire addition made by the Assessing officer, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
