Royal Infrastructure v. Dy. CIT (2020) 425 ITR 491 / (2019) 265 Taxman 103 ( Mag.) (Guj)(HC). Editorial: SLP of Revenue is dismissed due to low tax effect ,Dy. CIT v. Royal Infrastructure (2023) 294 Taxman 432 (SC)

S.147: Reassessment — After the expiry of four years- No failure to disclose material facts – Form of return not requiring specification of persons mentioned in Section- Assessing Officer not examining the clauses – Reassessment notice is held to be not valid [ S.80IB(10)( e ) & (f) , 148,Art , 226 ]

The assessee submitted its return of income for the assessment year 2012-13 on August 4, 2012 computing the gross total income and claiming deduction under S.  80IB . The assessee filed an audit report under section 44AB of the Act in forms 3CB and 10CCB being the audit report for claiming deduction under section 80-IB of the Act. Thereafter, the case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny assessment. Deduction under section 80-IB(10) was allowed. After four years notice of reassessment was issued on the ground that there was no full and true disclosure of facts while claiming deduction under section 80IB(10) . On a writ  the Court held that   during the course of the original scrutiny proceedings, the Assessing Officer called for various details from the assessee, including details of the purchasers, their names, addresses with permanent account numbers etc., which were duly furnished by the assessee. When the assessee had disclosed all the material facts necessary for his assessment, but the Assessing Officer failed to consider the claim for deduction under section 80IB(10) in the context of clauses (e) and (f) thereof, it could not be said that there was any failure on the part of the assessee to disclose truly and fully all material facts necessary for its assessment. The notice was not valid.(AY.2012-13)