Rubix Trading Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO (Bombay High Court)
Bombay High Court held that reopening of the assessment would be permissible without there being any new or additional material available to the Assessing Office. Accordingly, reassessment notice is set aside and writ petition is allowed.
Facts- The petitioner is a company registered under the Companies Act and is engaged in the business of development of real estate projects. AO passed an order of assessment under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 19.01.2016 accepting the petitioner’s declared income. Thereafter, the case was reopened and AO issued the impugned notice.
Upon being supplied with the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer, the petitioner raised objections to the reopening of the assessment under a communication dated 12.07.2018. Such objections were however rejected by the Assessing Officer by order dated 30.08.2018. Hence, this petition.
Conclusion- Held that in the final order of assessment, the Assessing Officer had not elaborated this aspect but had not made any disallowance or addition in the hands of the assessee. Merely because the order of assessment was silent on a particular claim of the assessee, would not by itself mean that the same was not scrutinized or that the Assessing Officer had not formed an opinion with respect to the same. If after detailed scrutiny during the assessment, the Assessing Officer examines a claim but does not reject the claim of the assessee which had come up for scrutiny, would not enable the Revenue to argue that the Assessing Officer had not formed any opinion on such issue and, therefore, reopening of the assessment would be permissible without there being any new or additional material available to the Assessing Office.
