Section 147 – Reopening beyond four years – Reopening done to tax deemed rental income relying on Delhi High Court decision in CIT vs. Ansal Housing Finance and Leasing Company Ltd (2013) 354 ITR 180 – Held reopening is bad in law as all primary facts disclosed during original assessment proceedings-Recorded reasons do not state what is not disclosed by Assessee – also change of opinion about manner of computation.

Reopening was done beyond four years relying on decision of Delhi High Court decision in CIT vs. Ansal Housing Finance and Leasing Company Ltd (2013) 354 ITR 180 to tax net deemed rental income of Rs 1,99,31,845/- has escaped assessment on closing stock of Rs 33,49,89,003/- . It was held that it was evident from the reasons recorded for reopening that the petitioner had truly and fully disclosed all material facts necessary for the purpose of assessment. In fact, in the reasons for reopening, there is not even a whisper as to what was not disclosed. The Assessing Officer has relied upon the records filed by petitioner including the profit and loss account and balance sheet and says from those records it is revealed that there is closing stock in trade of Rs.33,49,89,003/-. Therefore, the respondent No.1 is relying upon the same primary facts which were before the Assessing Officer who concluded the assessment proceedings to take a different view. Thus it is not a case where the assessment is sought to be reopened on the reasonable belief that income had escaped assessment on account of failure of assessee to disclose truly and fully all material facts that were necessary for computation of income but this is a case wherein the assessment sought to be reopened on account of change of opinion of the Assessing Officer about the manner of computation. In view of proviso to section 147 of the Act, the same is not permissible.