The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “A” Bench, Mumbai, has while deciding upon two cross appeals filed by the assessee and revenue, held that reopening notice can be issued under section 147 in relation to search and seizure.
The aforesaid observation was made by the Tribunal when two cross appeals were filed by the assessee and the Revenue, for the A.Y 2009-10 & 2010-11, against the separate orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-45 Mumbai, passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s 147 and 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
The ground of the appeal as raised by the assessee being that the CIT(A) has erred on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, in confirming the action of the AO for re-opening the assessment by issuing a notice u/s. 147 on mere basis of an information received from Investigation Wing and a statement recorded of the M/s Bhoomi Group Director u/s. 131, the assessee claimed the Confirmation of the initiation of reassessment proceedings in absence of any failure on its part to disclose material facts necessary for assessment, is bad in law and consequently needs to be quashed.
Hearing the rival submissions, perusing the materials on record and considering the facts and circumstances of the case at hand, the Tribunal, however observed as follows:
“We find that the provisions of Sec153A/153C of the Act are the special provisions dealing exclusively in the search cases and whereas the provisions of section 147 of the Act are invoked in all the types of escapements of income where the A.O. has recorded the satisfaction and has reason to believe.”
“ We find that the CIT(A) has considered the facts, provisions of law and judicial decisions and observed that in the case of search in Bhoomi group, incriminating material were found, where the aassesee is one of the investors in the land and the same was not disclosed by the Assessee in the original return of income or during original assesseement U/sec143(3) of the Act. We also find that the statement recorded above are linked with the assessee’s undisclosed income and that these facts were not disclosed in the return of income filed u/sec148 of the Act by the assessee”, the bench added.
“Thus, considering the material information and the statements recorded, we do not find merit in this ground of appeal and up hold the decision of the CIT(A) on the validity of re assesseement”, allowing the Revenue’s appeal and consequently dismissing that of the assessee’s , it concluded.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
