DVO opinion could not be regarded as information for the purpose of reopening an assessment U/s. 147

ACIT vs Dhariya Construction Co.  (Supreme Court) -  The opinion of the DVO per se is not an information for the purposes of reopening assessment under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Assessing Officer has to apply his mind to the information, if any, collected and must form a belief thereon. 

Supreme Court of India

ACIT vs Dhariya Construction Co.

Civil Appeal No. 9468 of 2003

S. H. Kapadia and Aftab Alam, JJ

16 February 2010

R. P. Bhatt, Sr. Adv., H. R. Rao, A K. Srivastava and B. V. Balaram Das, Advs. with him for the Appellant
Binu Tamta, Adv. for the Respondent

ORDER

Having examined the record, we find that in this case, the Department sought reopening of the assessment based on the opinion given by the District Valuation Officer (DVO). The opinion of the DVO per se is not an information for the purposes of reopening assessment under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Assessing Officer has to apply his mind to the information, if any, collected and must form a belief thereon. In the circumstances, there is no merit in the civil appeal. The Department was not entitled to reopen the assessment.

Civil appeal is, accordingly, dismissed. No order as to costs.

Related posts:

1. Validity of reopening of Assessment If Assessing Officer failed to disclose the basis on which he formed the opinion that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment
2. Reopening under section 147 by the AO on the same set of facts, without there being any additional information, can only be considered as change of opinion
3. If there is no failure to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for the purpose of the assessment, then the reopening of the assessment beyond four years from the end of the relevant assessment year is unsustainable
4. Reopening of an assessment on mere change of opinion without any tangible material is unsustainable
5. AO deemed to have applied his mind if facts are on record and reopening on change of opinion is not permissible even within 4 years