CitiusTech Healthcare Technology v. Dy. CIT [2024] 461 ITR 249 (Bom) (HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-No failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts-Notice and order disposing the objection is quashed and set aside [S.10AA, 148, Form No 56F, Art.226]

AO issued notice under section 148 so as to reopen assessment after expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year for the reason that perusal of the case records revealed that the assessee had claimed deduction under section 10AA in respect of its SEZ unit operating from Airoli and submitted Form No. 56F, without the signature, seal, membership number of the Chartered Accountant. Thus, said form could not be treated as valid. Thus, assessee was not eligible to claim deduction under section 10AA since its unit was formed by splitting up of or reconstruction of its business, which was already in existence. Assessee challenged the notice taking plea of proviso to section 147. The notice conveying ‘reasons to believe’ for reopening itself cited profit and loss statement and notes to the financial statements in relation to SEZ point which was already before AO during the original assessment proceedings. The notice also recorded that assessee had furnished Form No. 56F, copy of return of income along with the computation of income in which deduction under section 10AA was claimed.  The facts that assessee was conducting its operations from STP unit and SEZ unit was also evident in the Notes to Accounts forming part of the financial statements furnished by assessee during assessment proceedings. There was thus, no failure on part of assessee to make a full and true disclosure during original assessment proceedings and, therefore, reopening beyond four years was hit by proviso to section 147 and, therefore, reassessment notice and order disposing the objection is  set aside.(AY. 2015-16)