On writ the Court held that the assessee-society, in response to the query regarding the accumulation\/ deemed application u\/s 11(2), as specifically raised by the AO during the original scrutiny proceedings by issuing notices u\/s 143(2) and thereafter u\/s142(1), answered clearly bringing to the notice of the AO that they had claimed deemed application\/ accumulation u\/s 11(2) of Rs. 32 Crores and the after being satisfied with the explanation, AO passed his Order u\/s 143(3) concluding that the Petitioner being a Trust, the taxable income of the Petitioner was nil. Court held that there was no failure on the part of the assessee to fully and truly disclose all material facts necessary for AY 2013-14 which would give jurisdiction to the current AO to initiate re-assessment proceedings under Sections 147 and 148 of the Income Tax Act more particularly because admittedly the Section 148 notice has been issued after a period of 4 years from the date of the end of the relevant Assessment Year. The Hon. Court also agreed with Petitioner that on perusing the reasons for re-opening the assessment, it can be seen that it is nothing but a change of opinion which wholly impermissible and does not allow the Assessing Officer to reopen the Assessment. It was also held that the power given to the Assessing Officer is not to review the earlier order but only to reassess and both are quite different. Reassessment can only take place (if the first proviso to Section 147 is attracted) when there is a failure to disclose all material facts necessary for that particular Assessment Year. If that jurisdictional requirement is not met, the Assessing Officer has no power to reopen the assessment or issue any notice under Section 148 of IT Act. (AY. 2013-14)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
S.147: Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-Educational Society-Accumulation of income-Reassessment notice and order disposing the objection was quashed and set aside. [S. 11 (2), 14 Art. 226]<\/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-59595","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-fvd","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/59595","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=59595"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/59595\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":59596,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/59595\/revisions\/59596"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=59595"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=59595"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=59595"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}