Reopening after 4 Years in absence of failure of Assessee to disclose fully & truly all materials was invalid

CIT Vs John Ettimootil Samuel (Madras High Court)

The Tribunal, in our view, rightly took note of the fact that the reopening of the assessment was after four years and there was no tangible material to establish that the assessee failed to disclose fully and truly all materials, which are required for the assessment at the first instance. Furthermore, the Tribunal took note of the fact that the assessee has furnished all necessary details required for completing the assessment including the photostat copies of the Sale Deed. Further, the Tribunal observed that the original Sale Deed will always be with the buyer of the property and the assessee will have only a certified copy and the Assessing Officer did not insist upon production of the original Sale Deed while completing the assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act. Therefore, it was held that there was no case for reopening the assessment.

FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

This appeal, by the appellant/Revenue, filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), is directed against the order dated 26.11.2012 made in I.T.A.No.1703(Mds)/2012 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ‘D’ Bench, Chennai (for brevity “the Tribunal”) for the assessment year 2005-06.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.