Renew Your Membership by 31st October 2024! Renew Now!

October 2022

Reassessment — (A) Notice after four years — Condition precedent — Notice based on information during survey of third party that assessee beneficiary of contract with surveyed party — Reasons recorded for reopening assessment not mentioning information withheld by assessee or any new material found by assessing authority — Assessee disclosing all material facts fully and truly — Reasons cannot be improved upon or supplemented — Notice and order rejecting objections of assessee set aside

(B) Principles of natural justice — Failure to provide assessee copies of judgments relied upon by AO — Violation of principles of natural justice — Notice and order rejecting objections of assessee set aside

By K. B. Bhujle, Advocate
Reading Time 4 mins
47 Patel Engineering Ltd. vs. Dy. CIT
[2022] 446 ITR 728 (Bom.)
A.Y.: 2012-13
Date of order: 25th January, 2022
Ss. 133A, 147 and 148 of ITA, 1961

Reassessment — (A) Notice after four years — Condition precedent — Notice based on information during survey of third party that assessee beneficiary of contract with surveyed party — Reasons recorded for reopening assessment not mentioning information withheld by assessee or any new material found by assessing authority — Assessee disclosing all material facts fully and truly — Reasons cannot be improved upon or supplemented — Notice and order rejecting objections of assessee set aside


(B) Principles of natural justice — Failure to provide assessee copies of judgments relied upon by AO — Violation of principles of natural justice — Notice and order rejecting objections of assessee set aside

For the A.Y. 2012-13, in response to the notice u/s 142(1) r.w.s. 129 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the assessee furnished the details required by the Assessing Officer which included the receipt of Rs. 14,92,47,452 from SECPL and submitted that the amount was declared as income. Thereafter, the assessment order u/s 143(3) was passed. After four years the Assessing Officer issued a notice against the assessee u/s 148 to reopen the assessment u/s 147 on the ground that according to a survey conducted u/s 133A on SECPL, the assessee had received a contract for