You may also like...
Justice T. Raja dismissed the petition filed by S. Balakrishnan, challenging the order of the DG of CISF dated July 27, 2015.
by sekar · Published January 20, 2019
Re-Assessment for Second Time is Valid on basis of Tangible Materials: Madras HC [Read Judgment] Income / Losses declared by Investor Companies not a Sole Criterion to examine Creditworthiness of Shareholders: ITAT [Read Order] Payment for Encashment of Bank Guarantee and Interest on Late Payment is Capital Expenditure: Delhi High Court [Read Judgment] Deduction for “Foreign project” available to Works in connection with Shut Down of Refinery: Madras HC [Read Judgment] Income from Flats and Shops held as Stock-in-Trade is Business Income: ITAT [Read Order] GST: CBIC clarifies Issues on Refund [Read Circular] New Regulatory for ICAI, ICSI & ICWAI on the Cards HEADLINES | INCOME TAX | TOP STORIES Re-Assessment for Second Time is Valid on basis of Tangible Materials: Madras HC [Read Judgment] October 29, 2018 4:30 pm| By : Tax Scan Team The Madras High Court has held that the re-assessment can be made under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 even for the second time on basis of tangible materials brought on record. In the instant case, the reassessment proceedings were initiated against the assessee by issuing the notice. During the course of the hearing, the assessee was asked the details of sources and nature of cash deposits and to file the copies of bank accounts and other evidence. The AO on scrutiny of bank accounts completed the reassessment by adding the shortfall in cash withdrawal of Rs.10.50 lakhs as unexplained income. However, the AO once again reopened the assessment by issuing notice under section 148 for the reason that one S.Nagarajan has received a sum of Rs.2.75 crores from the deceased L.S. Abinesh, husband of the assessee, for the purchase of property through his bank account and that sources for such advance made require to be verified. On appeal, the assessee contended that during the course of the first reassessment proceedings, copies of bank statements, receipts and payments account were produced including the sources of all deposits made and that the assessment was completed after due verification of all receipts and payments and the sources and therefore, the proposal to reopen to re-verify the source of advance given to S Nagaraj amounts to change of opinion based on which, assessment cannot be re-opened. It was also contended that the very reopening of the assessment for the second time was beyond four years and therefore, was barred by limitation. Justice K. Ravichandrabaabu noted that the material filed before the Assessing Officer, during the earlier re-assessment proceedings also containing the disclosure of advance made to S.Nagarajan is sought to be relied on by the assessee to contend that there was full and true disclosure of all material facts before the Assessing Officer and therefore, invoking the first proviso under section 147 to reopen the assessment beyond the period of limitation, cannot be sustained. “On the other hand, the said material is sought to be relied on by the Revenue as a tangible material for reopening the assessment once again. It is not in dispute that the original assessment can be reopened at any number of times within the period of limitation prescribed under section 147 read with section 149. In this case, admittedly, the reopening of the assessment was initiated after the period of four years. In order to justify such reopening after such limitation period, the Revenue has to satisfy that any one of the ingredients as stipulated under the first proviso to section 147 is satisfied.” It was noted that it is evident that the original return filed by the assessee, which is sought to be treated as that of the return filed in response to the notice under section 148, did not disclose truly and fully the material facts, more particularly, in respect of the subject matter transaction. “Therefore, such transaction which came to the notice of the Assessing Officer, while reopening the assessment earlier, is certainly, a tangible material, based on which, the present reopening under section 147, can be resorted to. Admittedly, this material was not existing at the time of original assessment. No doubt, it is sought to have contended that the said material was placed before the Assessing Officer during the earlier reassessment proceedings and however, he has not taken note of the same. I have already pointed out that the earlier reopening of the assessment was based on some other issue and therefore, the assessee is not justified in contending that no new material is available before the Assessing Officer for the present reopening,” the Court said. To Read the full text of the Judgment CLICK Read more at: http://www.taxscan.in/re-assessment-tangible-madras-hc/30155/
by sekar · Published October 30, 2018