EVERGREEN WELFARE ASSOCIATION,PATNA vs. A.O., DCIT, CIRCLE-1, PATNA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 197/PAT/2018Status: DisposedITAT Patna20 January 2021AY 2007-083 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that re-opening of assessment cannot be based on information already known to the AO before the expiry of the limitation period for issuing a notice under Section 143(2). Since the AO did not frame assessment under Section 143(3) and no fresh material came to light, the re-assessment proceedings were quashed.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeals were against re-assessment proceedings initiated under Section 147. The assessee argued that the Assessing Officer (AO) lacked new information to form a belief of escaped income, as the information was already known during a survey before the limitation period for issuing a notice under Section 143(2) expired.

What were the issues?

Whether re-assessment proceedings under Section 147 are valid when initiated based on information already possessed by the AO before the expiry of the limitation period for issuing a notice under Section 143(2).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 143(2),Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PATNA “SMC” BENCH

Before: Shri Sanjay Garg

आदेश /O R D E R The present appeals have been preferred by the assessee against the common order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-1, Patna [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] dated 28.05.2018. The assessee in these appeals has contested the validity of the re-assessment framed u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’).

2.

The short plea raised by the Ld. counsel for the assessee during the hearing is that no new information had come into the knowledge or possession of the Assessing Officer for forming the belief that the income of the assessee has escaped assessment. Ld. counsel in this respect has relied upon the following chart:- S.No. Particulars ITA No.197/Pat/18 ITA No.196-197/Pat/2018 A.Ys. 06-07 & 07-08 Evergreen Welfare Association Vs. DCIT, Cir-1, Patna Page 2 A.Y 2006-07 A.Y. 2007-08 (a) Due date of filing return us/s 31.10.2006 31.12.2007 139(1) (b) ITR filed on 30.06.2006 31.12.2007 (c) Date till the notice u/s 143(2) 31.03.2008 31.03.2009 could be issued (d) Survey take place 03.11.2006 03.11.2006 (e) Processing u/s 147 initiated 17.07.2009 17.07.2009 Ld. counsel has submitted that for AY 2006-07 the due date for filing the return u/s 139(1) was on 31.10.2006 whereas for AY 2007-08 the same was 31.12.2007. The last date upto which the notice u/s 143(2) of the Act could have been issued in respect of return filed for AY 2006-07 was on 31.03.2008 whereas for AY 2007-08 the same was on 31.03.2009. However, a survey action on the premises of the assessee had taken place on 03.11.2006 on which date, some alleged information about the income of the assessee had come into notice of the Income Tax Authorities Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer, for the reason, best known to him did not chose to scrutinise the return and frame assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act. That after the expiry of the last date to issue notice u/s 143(2) of the Act, the return filed by the assessee had become final. However, without any tangible material or any fresh information coming into the knowledge of the Assessing Officer, the Assessing Officer initiated re-assessment proceedings u/s 147 of the Act on 17.07.2009 on the basis of the alleged information collected during survey action on 03.11.2006. Ld. DR has not disputed about the above said factual position relating date and events.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →