Full News
ITAT quashed reopening as there was no negligence on assessee’s part
ITAT quashed reopening as there was no negligence on assessee’s part
In Sh A Ravindran’s case, assessment order was passed u/s 143(3) (of Income Tax Act, 1961). Subsequently, AO issued notice u/s 148 (of Income Tax Act, 1961) and reopened assessment on the ground that sale consideration received by assessee of Rs 96 lakhs and the cash credit of Rs 6.5 lakhs were not offered to taxation. CIT(A) upheld reopening of assessment. ITAT quashed reopening as there was no negligence on assessee’s part in furnishing required details for completing assessment.-500412
1. Sh A Ravindran filed his return of income admitting a total income of Rs 3.9 lakhs and agricultural income of Rs 75,000.
2. The assessment order was passed u/s 143(3) (of Income Tax Act, 1961) determining the total income at Rs 4.5 lakhs and agricultural income at Rs 75,000.
3. Subsequently, AO issued notice u/s 148 (of Income Tax Act, 1961) and reopened assessment on the ground that sale consideration received by assessee of Rs 96 lakhs and the cash credit of Rs 6.5 lakhs were not offered to taxation.
4. Assessee stated Rs 6.5 lakhs was not a fresh capital introduced but only a contra of business accounts in the previous books of account.
5. With regard to advance of Rs 96 lakhs assessee explained that it was an advance received for sale of land.
6. CIT(A) upheld the reopening of assessment.
On appeal, the ITAT held as under:
7. It is unfortunate that the CIT(Appeals) has not considered the letter of the assessee dated 21.10.2009, which was filed before the Assessing Officer.
8. The letter dated 21.10.2009 is very clear and the assessee has explained before the Assessing Officer with regard to so-called capital of Rs 6,50,000 and receipt of Rs 96,75,000.
9. In those factual situation, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that there was no negligence on the part of the assessee in furnishing the required details for completing the assessment.
10. Since there was no negligence on the part of the assessee, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that reopening of the assessment beyond four years period from the end of the relevant assessment year is not justified.
11. The orders of the lower authorities are set aside and the reassessment is quashed.
Case Reference - Shri A. Ravindran, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax.
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "A" BENCH, CHENNAI
BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND
SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
ITA No.1150/Mds/2015
(Assessment Year : 2006-07)
×
