Case Law Details
ITO Vs Deepak Bajaj (ITAT Kolkata)
In this case the only information which was available to the Assessing Officer was that there were turnover of more than Rs.3 crores out of which there was withdrawal of cash was Rs.94.97 lacs in the bank account of the assessee. Except the aforesaid information, there was no information available to the Assessing Officer that the income of the assessee in any manner has escaped assessment.
Even the Assessing Officer did not correlate the aforesaid transaction in the bank account with the accounts of the assessee to form the belief regarding the escapement of income. Merely that there were huge turnover i.e. deposits and withdrawal in the bank account of the assessee without correlating the same with the accounts and with the nature of the business of the assessee, in our view, that was not enough to form a belief of escapement of income of the assessee for the assessment year under consideration.
Assessing Officer should have given opportunity to the assessee to contest the reopening and file objections against the reasons recorded
Even as pointed out by the ld. AR, the reopening was made at the last date of the 6th year from the end of the assessment year under consideration, which was the last day of limitation period for the Assessing Officer to reopen the assessment. As per the settled law, the Assessing Officer should have given opportunity to the assessee to contest the reopening and file objections against the reasons recorded. However, in this case, the reopening was done on the last date of limitation period, therefore, no opportunity to file objections has been granted to the assessee which violates the principles of natural justice.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
