TMI Blog2021 (11) TMI 812X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ccount of failure of assessee to disclose truly and fully all material facts that were necessary for computation of income but was a case wherein assessment was sought to be reopened on account of change of opinion of Assessing Officer about manner of computation of deduction under section 57, reopening was not justified. When the primary facts necessary for assessment are fully and truly disclosed, the Assessing Officer is not entitled to a change of opinion for commencing proceedings for reassessment. It is also held that when on consideration of the material on record, one view is conclusively taken by the Assessing Officer, it would not be open for the Assessing Officer to reopen assessment based on the very same material and to take ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion granted under Section 151 of the said Act by Respondent No.3. 3. Petitioner who is a real estate developer, offered his income on the basis of project completion method up to AY 2011-12. On 10/12/2012, a survey under Section 133A of the said Act was conducted at the premises of Petitioner wherein Respondent No.2 accepted offer of Petitioner to offer income @ 9% of incremental work-in-progress. Accordingly, a revised return was filed by Petitioner on 30/03/2013 for AY 2012-13 declaring total income of ₹ 80,44,900/-. 4. Petitioner's case was thereafter selected for scrutiny by issuing notice under Section 143(2) of the said Act. During the assessment proceeding, details of Individual Transaction Statement (ITS) data in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r had not disclosed turnover of ₹ 60,02,95,478/- resulting into escapement of income within the meaning of clause (b) of Explanation 2 of Section 147 of the said Act. 8. Petitioner, by letter dated 22/07/2019, objected to reopening of assessment and 'reason to believe' recorded for re-opening of assessment. Respondent No.2, on 13/11/2019, rejected the objections / request of Petitioner to drop re-assessment proceedings. Respondent No.2, on 13/11/2019 itself, provided copy of sanction obtained from Respondent No.3; however, details on which reliance was placed by Respondent No.2 was not supplied. 9. Petitioner has, therefore, challenged re-assessment proceedings by way of present Petition. This Court, on 06/12/2019, grant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng offer of income of Petitioner @ 9% incremental work-in-progress. He, therefore, submitted that Petitioner will have opportunity to present his case in detail before Respondent No.2 and interference at this stage is not necessary. 13. On careful scrutiny of the documents placed on record, particularly reply at Exh.B dated 10/02/2015 along with its annexures giving details in respect of data pertaining to ITS as found in AIR CIB transactions and also method of accounting, we are satisfied that this is a case of mere change of opinion as there was no tangible material to come to the conclusion that there is escapement of income from assessment. From the record, it is clear that Assessing Officer had raised a query and the Petitioner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itioner (Exh.B), it is clear that the Assessing Officer was aware of the issue of AIR and ITS data. Once the Assessing Officer had applied his mind in regular assessment proceeding of Petitioner having sold 29 flats, it is not open for Assessing Officer to reopen the assessment in absence of material to show escapement of income. This Court, in Aroni Commercial Limited Vs. Dy. CIT (2014) 362 ITR 403 and in Marico Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (2019) 111 Taxmann.com 53 had taken a similar view. 16. We are, therefore, satisfied that the Assessing Officer is reopening the assessment merely on the basis of change of opinion which is not permissible and hence could not have issued a notice of re-opening of assessment to Pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
