Jamsetjee Jejeebhoy Charity Fund Vs ITO (Exemption) (Bombay High Court)
Bombay High Court held that reopening of assessment proceedings on the basis of change of mind/opinion and also on non-application of mind is liable to be quashed and set aside. Accordingly, impugned notices and order quashed.
Facts- By the present Petition, the Petitioner has impugned the Notices dated 9th August 2024 and 20th August 2024, which are issued under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The relevant Assessment Year (A.Y.) is 2018-2019. Further, the Petitioner has also impugned the order dated 28th August 2024, passed by the 1st Respondent under Section 148A(d) of the Act. The Petitioner has also impugned the Notice dated 28th August 2024 issued by the 1st Respondent under Section 148 of the Act. By the Notice dated 28th August 2024, the 1st Respondent has reopened the assessment of the Petitioner for A.Y. 2018-2019. The Revenue has filed its Reply dated 14th November 2024 to the Petition, which is affirmed on behalf of the 1st and the 2nd Respondent by one Mr. Pravin Kumar. The Petitioner has filed its Rejoinder to the Revenue’s Reply.
Conclusion- This Court in Chandrakant Narayan Patkar Charitable Trust Vs. Income-tax officer (Exemption) [2022] 138 taxmann.com 564 (Bombay). In this case, this Court has taken a view that when there is no tangible material or no new information and no fresh material was placed before the Revenue, then the Revenue cannot justify the reopening of the assessment. The reopening cannot be based on a change of opinion. In the present case, all the material particulars and documents were before the Assessing Officer when the original assessment was conducted. There is no new material before the Revenue, nor are there any new facts or information to justify the reopening of the assessment.
