Dismissing the appeal of the Revenue the Court held that\u00a0 the Assessing Officer had proceeded solely on the basis of what had come to be recorded in the course of the sales tax survey. The Assessing Officer had not only failed to independently examine those allegations, but had abjectly failed to enquire and ascertain the status of the proceedings under the sales tax statute. If that had been done, he would have found that there existed no outstanding demands or orders of assessment against the assessee on the basis of the survey which had been originally conducted on the date when the notice under section\u00a0148\u00a0was issued. The Tribunal had recorded that on December 30, 2010 the original order of assessment itself had been set aside by the appellate authority and the matter was remitted to the Assessing Officer under the sales tax enactment for making a fresh assessment and that till date no fresh assessment under the Sales-tax Act had been made. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) had taken a view on a \u201cprima facie\u201d formation of opinion to uphold the reassessment proceedings under section\u00a0147. On the facts, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the reopening of the assessment under section\u00a0147\u00a0by the Assessing Officer was without application of mind and hence invalid.(AY. 2005-06)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
S. 147 : Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-Survey-Suppression of sales-Information of Investigation Wing of Sales-Tax Department-Failure to make independent Inquiry by Assessing Officer-Reassessment is invalid.[S.133A, 143(3), 148, 260A] <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","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":""},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-48576","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-cDu","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/48576","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=48576"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/48576\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":48577,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/48576\/revisions\/48577"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=48576"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=48576"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=48576"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}