TMI Blog2021 (1) TMI 536X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly in favour of the assessee and no assessment could have been reopened in such circumstances against the assessee. Reasons recorded u/s 148 clearly show that assessment already framed u/s 143(3) has been reopened because of omission on the part of the AO to make addition in the original assessment order. Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of Techman Buildwell [ 2014 (2) TMI 1169 - DELHI HIGH COURT] held that AO s omission sole basis of initiating proceedings u/s 148 of the Act, notice not valid. At the original assessment stage AO considered the issue of claim of deduction on account of interest to the banks and others and as such, on mere change of opinion AO could not have reopened the assessment. Thus, the omission of the AO to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tted before AO the return filed originally may be treated as return filed in response to notice u/s 148 of the Act. The AO after giving opportunity of being heard to the assessee disallowed the interest paid by assessee amounting to ₹ 11,13,955/- for violation of provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act for failure to deduct tax at source. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition but directed the AO to reduce the amount of ₹ 50,000/- which was also disallowed by the AO. The Ld. CIT(A) also dismissed the ground of appeal of the assessee, challenging the reopening of the assessment. 4. Ld. Counsel for assessee referred to PB 33 which is the reason for reopening of the assessment. The same is reproduced as under: - 1. Name ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e that the assessee had an income of ₹ 11,13,955/- chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment for the AY 2008-09. To assess the income of ₹ 11,13,955/- and any other income which may come in notice during assessment proceedings u/s 147 permission may kindly be granted to issue notice u/s 148 of the Act to bring undisclosed income of ₹ 11,13,955/- to tax for the AY 2008-09. Sd/- (Parmod Pal Singh) Income-tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Faridabad 5. Ld. Counsel for assessee submitted that all facts have been disclosed fully and truly for the purpose of assessment on which the AO examined the allowability of the interest claimed at ₹ 11,13,955/- in the original assessment order and disallowed &# ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d is considered by the AO also at original assessment stage, therefore, there is no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for that assessment. The assessee also filed return of income originally on dated 30.09.2008 u/s 139 of the Act and four years have expired from the relevant assessment order, therefore, first proviso to section 147 would apply in favour of the assessee and no assessment could have been reopened in such circumstances against the assessee. Further, the reasons recorded u/s 148 clearly show that assessment already framed u/s 143(3) has been reopened because of omission on the part of the AO to make addition in the original assessment order. The Hon ble Bombay High Cour ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
