TMI Blog2016 (6) TMI 1459X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2 (9) TMI 16 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] holding that notice under section 148 was not issued by the AO after lying his hand on any information which enable him to form a belief that the income has escaped assessment. The ld.AO merely sought to reopen the assessment for verification of the details, which is not contemplated under section 147 of the Act - Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. - ITA No. 756/Ahd/2013 - - - Dated:- 6-6-2016 - SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER For the Assessee : None For the Revenue : Shri Kamlesh Makwana, Sr.DR ORDER The Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of the Ld.CIT(A)-III, Baroda dated 17.12.2012 passed in the Asstt.Year 2002-03. 2. Solitary grievance of the Reven ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 04 claiming refund of Rs, 16,59,357, The same was however, treated as defective and treated as fifed vide this letter No. BRD/ITO 4(3)/SPL/03-04 dated 31.03.2004, The assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. ClT(A)-III Baroda against not giving credit of TDS of Rs. 1,07,492 for A Y 1999- 2000, ld. CIT (A)-III, Baroda vide her order in CAB/III/2 16/04-05 dated 10.03.2005 (Zerox copy placed on record) has directed to allow the TDS credit for Rs. 1,07,492 in AY 2002-03, if the income has been offered for tax in any of Year i.e. 1999-2000, 2000-01. 3. I have considered the application filed by the assessee. The assessee is in receipt of interest income of Rs.3,99,318 (Daman Division) in AY 1999-2000, Rs. 1,14,649 (Daman Division) in AY 20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f interest) involving the return of income shown in different asst years, it is necessary to verify and assess the income of the Asst Year 2002-03. Therefore, I have reason to believe that income/Loss of (-) 74,78,980 and income of Rs. Nil after business income 23,63,583 chargeable to tax has escaped assessment, Notice u/s 148 dated 13.10.2006 of the Act issued accordingly. 5. The ld.First Appellate Authority after perusal of the above reasons observed that the AO failed to make out any case for escapement of income. He sought to reopen the assessment merely for re-verification of certain documents, which is not contemplated in the Act. The finding recorded by the ld.CIT(A) is worth note. It reads as under: 4.2 I have perused the fa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... veri Stock Brokers P. Ltd., (supra) and several other decisions, such reason to believe need not necessarily be a firm final decision of the Assessing Officer. 17. If we accept such proposition, the petitioner's apprehension that the Assessing Officer would arbitrarily exercise powers under section 147 of the Act to circumvent the scrutiny proceedings which could not be framed in view of notice under section 143(2) having become time barred, would be taken care of. To reiterate, even for reopening of an assessment which was accepted previously under section 143(1) of the Act without scrutiny, the Assessing Officer should have reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. 18. Reverting to the facts of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ble jurisdictional High Court in holding that notice under section 148 was not issued by the AO after lying his hand on any information which enable him to form a belief that the income has escaped assessment. The ld.AO merely sought to reopen the assessment for verification of the details, which is not contemplated under section 147 of the Act. Again, I do not find any disparity of facts between the decision of the Hon ble jurisdictional High Court extracted by the ld.CIT(A) in the order (extracted supra) vis- -vis reasons recorded in the case of the assessee. Therefore, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. 7. In result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the Court on 6th June, 2016 at Ahmedabad. - - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
