No addition can be made on issues for which case was not reopened. Reassessment quashed as addition made on issues not recorded in reasons.
The case of the appellant assessee in this case was when no addition has been made on the issue for which the case was reopened under section 147, the AO could not have made any other addition without issuing fresh notice under section 148 after recording reasons under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) for escapement of income.
ABCAUS Case Law Citation
ABCAUS 3514 (2021) (06) ITAT
Important case law relied referred:
Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd., vs. CIT
CIT vs., Jet Airways India Ltd. [2011] 331 ITR 236 (Bom.)
On the basis of the information received from the Investigation Wing, that the assessee had purchased insurance policy in crores and surrendered it within three years, the Assessing Officer (AO) after recording the reasons, reopened the assessment under section 147 of the Act.
During the course of the re-assessment proceedings, the A.O., on verification of the Bank A/c of the assessee found that the transactions pertaining to the insurance policy were properly explained and no adverse inference was drawn with regard to issue of insurance.
However, the A.O. noted that there are entries of large receipt in its bank account and therefore, asked the assessee to explain the same.
Not agreeing with the explanation of the assessee, the AO held the receipts to be unexplained and accordingly, made addition to the total income of the assessee.
The CIT(A) sustained the addition.
Before the Tribunal, the assessee raised additional ground challenging the assumption of jurisdiction for reopening the case.
The assessee submitted that the A.O. has not made any addition for which the reopening was made, but, made addition on some other ground.
Placing reliance on various judgments, the Tribunal held that admittedly when no addition had been made on account of the issue for which the case of the assessee was reopened but addition has been made on some other ground without issuing fresh notice undersection148 after recording reasons under section 147 for escapement of income, therefore, the addition made by the AO did not survive being not in accordance with Law.
The Tribunal accordingly, set aside the Order of the CIT(A) and the AO was directed to delete the addition.
First-time experience in filing appeal was a reasonable and bona fide cause for delay – ITAT condoned delay In a…
Mere nondisclosure of place of destination in the documents cannot be a ground for seizure u/s 129 of GST Act.…
Imposition of exorbitant interest in contemporary commercial practices not against the fundamental policy of Indian Law, or against the morality…
Assessees was not required to prove the “source of the source‟ of funds received as unsecured loans Prior to the…
The contention that during the pendency of case before settlement commission, the assessee must give up his right to contest…
Entire amount of undisclosed money cannot be treated as income and only estimated profit embedded in these transactions may only…