Supreme Court Urged Railways to Drop the Term Second-Class Passengers  ||  Supreme Court: Employers Cannot Deny Compassionate Appointments Through Delays  ||  Supreme Court Explains How Testimony of a Dead Witness Can be Used Against an Absconding Accused  ||  SC Recommended Amending IBC to Ensure Fair Repayment Protection for MSME Operational Creditors  ||  Supreme Court: High Courts Cannot Reappreciate Evidence in Certiorari Jurisdiction  ||  SC: Railways are Not Liable Unless Owner-Risk Goods Were Counted or Weighed  ||  SC: Courts and Prosecutors Must Expedite Trials For Jailed Accused  ||  Supreme Court Clarifies that Swear Words and Vulgar Expletives Alone do Not Constitute Obscenity  ||  Supreme Court: Nominated Town Panchayat Members Have No Voting Rights in Council Polls  ||  Delhi High Court Declines Interim Relief to Sonam Wangchuk, Upholds His Hospitalization    

M.A. Projects Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs ACIT - (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) (20 May 2022)

In the absence of fresh tangible material, the action under Section 147 of the IT Act by the AO is not tenable

MANU/ID/0729/2022

Direct Taxation

The case of the assessee has been taken up for scrutiny and assessment order under Section 153A read with 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (IT Act) was passed. The notice under Section 148 of the IT Act was issued, the representative of the assessee has participated in the assessment proceedings. The assessment order came to be passed by making addition of Rs. 45,00,000 on account of unexplained income from share applicants. As against the assessment order, the assessee has preferred an appeal before the CIT(A). The Learned CIT(A) by order dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee.

The Learned A.O has made an addition of Rs. 45,00,000 under Section 68 of the IT Act, on the ground that the assessee failed to prove the identity and creditworthiness of share applicants i.e. Indlon Hosiery P. Ltd., Multi-tech Semi Conductors P. Ltd. and Oracle M.A Projects. Pvt. Ltd. Cables P. Ltd. The above said information were very well in existence in the hands of the AO when the original assessment order was passed. Therefore, the reopening of assessment was without any fresh tangible material. It is well settled law that, in the absence of fresh tangible material, the action under Section 147 of the IT Act by the AO is not tenable under the law.

In view of the discussion, reopening of the assessment is clearly bad in law and liable to be quashed, accordingly the assessee's grounds of Appeal are allowed and the order of Lower Authorities is set aside, resultantly, additions stands deleted. Appeal of the assessee is allowed.

Tags : ASSESSMENT   REOPENING   LEGALITY  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved