M/S. ALLABAKSHA MEHBOOB MULLA,SANGLI vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2 (1), SANGLI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1765/PUN/2019Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 August 2022AY 2009-102 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal quashed the impugned reopening proceedings. The reopening reason did not indicate that the assessee's taxable income had escaped assessment due to failure in fully and truly disclosing all relevant particulars.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order concerning reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 147. The Assessing Officer had issued a notice for reopening after framing a regular assessment earlier.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the validity of the reopening of assessment under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, PUNE

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B. Phadke
For Respondent: Shri M.G. Jasnani
Hearing: 28.07.2022Pronounced: 25.08.2022

BEFORE SHRI S.S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER (Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/s. Allabaksha Mehboob Mulla The Income Tax Officer - 2(1) Guruwar Peth Opp. Biranale Pharmacy Vs. Battis Shirala College, Vishrambag Dist. Sangli 415408 Sangli 416416 PAN –AACFA4723A Appellant Respondent Appellant by: Shri Kishor B. Phadke Respondent by: Shri M.G. Jasnani Date of Hearing: 28.07.2022 Date of Pronouncement: 25.08.2022 O R D E R

Per S.S. Godara, JM

1.

This assessee’s appeal for AY 2009-10 arises against the CIT(A) 1, Kolhapur’s order dated 02.07.2019 passed in case No. SLI/10021/2016-17, involving proceedings under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act).

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

Delay of 2 days in filing of the instant appeal is condoned in view of the assessee’s condonation averments stating the same as neither intentional nor deliberate.

3.

Coming to assessee’s first and foremost substantive ground of validity of the impugned reopening, it emerges at the outset that the Assessing Officer had framed a regular assessment on 30.12.2011 followed by his section 148 notice dated 27.03.2015. Mr. Jasnani could hardly rebut the clinching fact that the same reopening reason nowhere indicated that the assessee’s taxable income had escaped assessment on account of it’s failure in “fully” and “truly” disclosing all the relevant particulars. Faced with this situation, I quote section 147 (1st proviso) and hon’ble jurisdictional high court’s landmark decision in Hindustan Lever Ltd. vs. R. B. Wadkar (2004) 268 ITR 332 (Bombay) to quash the impugned reopening for this precise reason alone. Ordered accordingly.

4.

All other pleadings on merits stand rendered academic.

5.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →