SHREE SAHAJ ALLOYS PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1486/AHD/2024Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 December 2024AY 2013-14Bench: DR.BRR KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT SHRI TR SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member)3 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 held that since the Assessing Officer had already inquired into the loans during the original assessment under Section 143(3), the reopening beyond four years was invalid. Consequently, the assessment conducted based on this invalid notice was annulled.

What were the facts?

The assessee's assessment for AY 2013-14 was completed on 25.02.2016. A notice under Section 148 for reopening the assessment was issued on 12.03.2020, beyond the four-year period stipulated in the proviso to Section 147.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the validity of reopening the assessment beyond the four-year period when the original assessment had already considered the relevant transactions. The secondary issues involved additions made under Section 68 and Section 69C.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 148,Section 143(3),Section 68,Section 69C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: DR.BRR KUMARSHRI TR SENTHIL KUMAR

For Appellant: Shri Tej Shah, AR
For Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.DR
Hearing: 11.12.2024Pronounced: 13.12.2024

(Assessment Year: 2013-14) Shree Sahaj Alloys Private Limited, Vs. D.C.I.T, 10/9, GIDC Phase 1, Circle 4(1)(1), Vatva, Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad-382445. [PAN No.AAJCS9576P] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Tej Shah, AR Respondent by: Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 11.12.2024 Date of Pronouncement 13.12.2024 O R D E R PER: DR. BRR KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT:

This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, vide order dated 26.06.2024 passed for the Assessment Year 2013-14.

2.

The Assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal:-

1.

The Learned CIT(A) erred in law and in the facts of the case in confirming the order of the AO in reopening the case of the appellant u/s.147 of the Act.

2. The Ld.CIT(A) erred in law and in the facts of the case in confirming the order of the AO in making addition of Rs.40,00,000/- as unexplained cash credits u/s.68 of the Act.

3. The CIT(A) erred in law and in the facts of the case in confirming the order of the AO in making addition of Rs.2,55,946/- as unexplained expenditure u/s.69C of the Act.

Shree Sahaj Alloys Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT Asst.Year –2013-14 - 2– 4. The CIT(A) erred in law and in the facts of the case in confirming the order of the AO in not providing the material gathered during the course of Sanjay Shah & Jignesh Shah as well as opportunity of cross examination.

3.

The pertinent facts for required for adjudication of the issue before us are as under:

• Assessment Year - 2013-14 • Date of completion of Assessment u/s.143 - 25.02.2016. • Date of issuance of notice u/s.148 - 12.03.2020. • The provisions of section 147 of the Act reads as under:

“…As per proviso to section 147, no action of reopening can be taken after the expiry of 4 years from the end of relevant assessment years in the case where an assessment had been made u/s 143(3). The proviso is reproduced as under: Provided that where an assessment under sub-section (3) of section 143 or this section has been made for the relevant assessment year, no action shall be taken under this section after the expiry of four years from the end of relevant assessment year, unless any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for such assessment year by reason of the failure on the part of the assessee to make a return under section 139 or in response to a notice issued under sub-section (1) of section 142 or section 148 or to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for his assessment for that assessment year…”

4.

From the records before us, we find that the Assessing Officer has duly inquired into the loans received from Mainak Comtrade Pvt. Ltd. and KS Trade Infra Pvt. Ltd. during the assessment proceedings conducted u/s.143(3) of the Act. Hence, it cannot be said that there has been a failure on the part of the assessee to disclose the material fully and truly before the Revenue authorities. Hence, keeping in view, the clear provisions of the Act, we hold that the notice issued u/s.148 of the Act beyond four years period to examine the loans received from Mainak Comtrade Pvt. Ltd. and KS Trade Infra Pvt. Ltd. cannot be held to be valid and accordingly assessment conducted in this case is hereby annulled.

5.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.

Order pronounced in Open Court on 13.12.2024

Sd/- Sd/- (TR SENTHIL KUMAR) (DR. BRR KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT Ahmedabad; Dated 13.12.2024 Manish, Sr. PS TRUE COPY आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत 1. अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 2. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 3. संबं�धत आयकर आयु त / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु त(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील(य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड- फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, आदेशानुसार आदेशानुसार आदेशानुसार

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →