ITAT quashes reopening as AO provided only a Part of reason recorded to Assessee

Wimco seedlings Ltd Vs JCIT (ITAT Delhi)

ITAT quashed reopening where reasons recorded by the assessing officer produced before the higher authority are quite different and whereas the extract given to the assessee was merely of two paragraphs

Delhi ITAT deprecated & reprimanded on revenue conduct in reopening case by giving two sets of reasons recorded one to assessee & another to court by holding that :-

On perusal of above two statements (one) the reasons supplied it to the assessee and (two) the reasons some before the High Court, it is apparent that both are  altogether different. It is not denied that in context and in substance they are same but there should be same ad verbatim. It cannot be the case of the revenue that it gives few extracts of the reasons to the assessee to defend it against the reopening of the assessment and when cornered before the higher authorities, the revenue comes out with the detailed reasons recorded by the assessing officer. In fact in all circumstances the assessing officer is supposed to provide the complete reasons recorded for reopening of the assessment to facilitate the assessee to defend itself against the reopening of the assessment. To keep few arrows in its quiver and only disclosing few arrows out of that is not expected from a revenue officer. It also against the fair play rule of reassessment proceedings. In Haryana Acrylic Manufacturing Co V Commissioner of Income tax 308 ITR 38 [ Delhi] the identical issue arose.

Also the reasons recorded by the assessing officer produced before the honourable High Court are quite different and number eight whereas the extract given to the assessee was merely of two paragraphs. In view of this, respectfully following the decision of the honourable Delhi High Court we are not inclined to uphold the reopening of the assessment and hence they are quashed. The orders of the learned Commissioner of income tax upholding of the reopening of the assessment are reversed. Thus all the three assessment years reopening proceedings are held to be invalid and quashed

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