{"id":5431,"date":"2012-08-23T19:11:33","date_gmt":"2012-08-23T19:11:33","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/?p=5431"},"modified":"2012-08-23T19:11:33","modified_gmt":"2012-08-23T19:11:33","slug":"inductotherm-india-pvt-ltd-vs-dcit-gujarat-high-court-s-1431-intimation-cannot-be-reopened-us-147-in-absence-of-tangible-material","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/inductotherm-india-pvt-ltd-vs-dcit-gujarat-high-court-s-1431-intimation-cannot-be-reopened-us-147-in-absence-of-tangible-material\/","title":{"rendered":"Inductotherm (India) Pvt. Ltd vs. DCIT (Gujarat High Court)"},"content":{"rendered":"<table width=\"150\" border=\"0\" align=\"right\">\n<tr>\n<td><a href=\"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/?dl_id=810\" onclick=\"if (event.button==0) \r\n     setTimeout(function () { window.location = 'http:\/\/itatonline.org\/downloads.php?varname=dl_id=810&varname2=inductotherm_143_1_reopening.pdf'; }, 100)\" ><strong>Click here to download the judgement (inductotherm_143_1_reopening.pdf) <\/strong> <\/a><\/p><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n<p><strong><br \/>\nS. 143(1) intimation cannot be reopened u\/s 147 in absence of \u201ctangible material\u201d<br \/>\n<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>For AY 2002-03, the AO issued an Intimation u\/s 143(1) accepting the return. Subsequently, based on objections raised by the audit, he issued a s. 148 notice to reopen the assessment. The AO set out four issues in the recorded reasons and for two he stated that the reopening was to &#8220;<em>verify<\/em>&#8221; the expenditure. The assessee filed a Writ Petition to challenge the reopening inter alia on the ground that there was no reason to believe that income had escaped assessment. HELD by the High Court:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>Even in a case where only a s. 143(1) Intimation is passed, the power to reopen can be exercised only where there is &#8220;reason to believe that income has escaped assessment&#8221; and <strong>not merely to &#8220;scrutinize&#8221; the return<\/strong> or &#8220;<strong>verify<\/strong>&#8221; the expenditure. Further, even in case of reopening of an assessment which was previously accepted u\/s 143(1) without scrutiny, the AO would have power to reopen the assessment, provided he had some <strong>tangible material<\/strong> on the basis of which he could form a reason to believe that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment. Such reason to believe need not necessarily be a firm final decision of the AO. This safeguard is necessary to <strong>prevent arbitrary exercise of powers<\/strong> u\/s 147 to <strong>circumvent the scrutiny proceedings<\/strong> which could not be framed in view of notice u\/s 143(2) having become time barred. On facts, in respect of two issues, the AO reopened the assessment to verify the claims. <strong><em>For mere verification of the claim, power of reopening of assessment cannot be exercised<\/em><\/strong>. The AO in the guise of power to reopen an assessment cannot seek to undertake a <strong>fishing or roving inquiry<\/strong> and seek to verify the claims as if it were a scrutiny assessment.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p><strong>Note<\/strong>: The Petition was ultimately dismissed because for the other two issues, there was material to justify the reopening. <\/p>\n<div class=\"journal2\">\nFor more on reopening of s. 143(1) Intimation see <strong><a href=\"http:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/index.php\/telco-dadajee-dhackjee-ltd-vs-dcit-itat-mumbai-third-member-s-1431-assessment-cannot-be-reopened-us-147-in-absence-of-new-material\/\">Telco Dadajee Dhackjee<\/a><\/strong> (ITAT Mumbai Third Member) <\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p><!--\n\n\n\n\n\n\/\/--><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Even in a case where only a s. 143(1) Intimation is passed, the power to reopen can be exercised only where there is &#8220;reason to believe that income has escaped assessment&#8221; and <strong>not merely to &#8220;scrutinize&#8221; the return<\/strong> or &#8220;<strong>verify<\/strong>&#8221; the expenditure. Further, even in case of reopening of an assessment which was previously accepted u\/s 143(1) without scrutiny, the AO would have power to reopen the assessment, provided he had some <strong>tangible material<\/strong> on the basis of which he could form a reason to believe that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment. Such reason to believe need not necessarily be a firm final decision of the AO. This safeguard is necessary to <strong>prevent arbitrary exercise of powers<\/strong> u\/s 147 to <strong>circumvent the scrutiny proceedings<\/strong> which could not be framed in view of notice u\/s 143(2) having become time barred. On facts, in respect of two issues, the AO reopened the assessment to verify the claims. <strong><em>For mere verification of the claim, power of reopening of assessment cannot be exercised<\/em><\/strong>. The AO in the guise of power to reopen an assessment cannot seek to undertake a <strong>fishing or roving inquiry<\/strong> and seek to verify the claims as if it were a scrutiny assessment<\/p>\n<div class=\"read-more\"><a href=\"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/inductotherm-india-pvt-ltd-vs-dcit-gujarat-high-court-s-1431-intimation-cannot-be-reopened-us-147-in-absence-of-tangible-material\/\">Read more &#8250;<\/a><\/div>\n<p><!-- end of .read-more --><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[4,5],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-5431","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-all-judgements","category-high-court"],"acf":[],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5431","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5431"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5431\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5431"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5431"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5431"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}