Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2021 (4) TMI 392

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ned in the assessment order that the assessee had claimed deduction u/s 80IB and filed Form No.10CCBC instead of 10CCBD. The Ld.AR submitted that there was no material difference in both the forms with regard to information and columns are the same. The AO in the original assessment did not raise any objection for submission of 10CCBC and there was no difference with regard to information to be furnished in Form 10CCBC or 10CCBD, hence it was purely a mistake or misunderstanding. DR also did not controvert the submission of the assessee with regard to difference of information in 10CCBC or 10CCBD. The AO had accepted the 10CCBC and allowed the deduction in original assessment. This Tribunal in assessee s own case [ 2017 (6) TMI 1038 - IT .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the validity of assessment made u/s 148, since, it goes to the root of the assessment. In the instant case, the assessment was originally completed u/s 143(3) by an order dated 30/03/2015 and the same is furnished as page No.29 of paper book-2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee has filed its return of income for the A.Y.2012-13 declaring total income of Rs.Nil. In the return of income filed, the assessee claimed deduction u/s 80IB(11C) of the Act amounting to ₹ 17,20,290/-. The AO completed the assessment, accepting the income returned and allowed the deduction claimed u/s 80IB(11C). Subsequently, the case was reopened u/s 147 and the notice u/s 148 was issued, with a reason that the hospital building was completed by M .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 1. Since, there was no mention of the month in the completion certificate issued by Municipality, the present AO misunderstood that the building was not completed before December 2011. The assessee furnished the municipal tax receipts, but the AO did not take cognizance of the same. The Ld.AR explained that 1st day 2011 refers to 1st January 2011 and no other inference can be drawn since, it is very clear and there was no ambiguity. The Ld.AR further submitted that the assessee furnished the Form No.10CCBC and submitted that no objection was raised by the AO with regard to submission of 10CCBC instead of 10CCBD in the original assessment. The Ld.AR submitted that there was no difference in the information contained in Forms 10CCBC and 10CCB .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... assessment and hence, requested to quash the assessment made u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act. 9. On the other hand, the Ld.DR supported the orders of the lower authorities. 10. We have heard both the parties and perused the material placed on record. In the instant case, the assessment was completed u/s 143(3) by an order dated 30.03.2015. In the return of income filed by the assessee, the assessee had claimed the deduction u/s 80IB (11C) amounting to ₹ 17,20,289/- which was allowed by the AO. During the original assessment proceedings, the AO called for the necessary information in questionnaire as per page No. 25 of the paper book. The AO issued show cause notice vide letter dated 27.01.2015 and called for the details with r .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... o fresh information was received by the AO. Revisiting the same issue which was already considered in original assessment and taken the decision amounts to difference of opinion and on difference of opinion the reopening of assessment is not permissible. The AO mentioned in the assessment order that the assessee had claimed deduction u/s 80IB and filed Form No.10CCBC instead of 10CCBD. The Ld.AR submitted that there was no material difference in both the forms with regard to information and columns are the same. The AO in the original assessment did not raise any objection for submission of 10CCBC and there was no difference with regard to information to be furnished in Form 10CCBC or 10CCBD, hence it was purely a mistake or misunderstandin .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates