Notice for re-assessment quashed by Hon'ble HC, Bombay as the Assessee fully, truly disclosed all material facts

Last updated: 25 November 2021
Quick Summary
The Bombay High Court has quashed a re-assessment notice issued to M/s Ananta Landmark Pvt. Ltd. The court ruled that for an assessment to be reopened after four years, there must be a failure by the assessee to disclose all material facts. In this case, the court found that the assessee had indeed fully and truly disclosed all necessary information. Therefore, the re-opening was based on a mere change of opinion by the Assessing Officer, not on any omission by the taxpayer.

Court :
Bombay High Court

Brief :
In M/s Ananta Landmark Pvt. Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax & Ors. [W.P. (C) No. 2814 of 2019 decided on September 14, 2021] Hon'ble Bombay High Court held that for an assessment to be reopened beyond a period of four years there must an omission or failure on part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for the assessment and should not merely be the change of opinion of Assessing Officer ("AO").

Citation :
W.P. (C) No. 2814 of 2019 decided on September 14, 2021

Daily Limit Reached

You have reached your daily limit of 2 Free Judgements

Subscribe to CCI PRO for unlimited access

Why Upgrade to CCI PRO?
  • No Ads
  • WhatsApp Broadcasts
  • Daily E-Newsletter
  • Unlimited Judgements Access
BEST VALUE
2 YEAR PLAN
3,499
(Inclusive of GST)
1 YEAR PLAN
1,999
(Inclusive of GST)
View all CCI PRO benfits

Already a PRO member? Login here for an ad-free experience.

 

Bimal Jain
Published in Income Tax
Views : 138
Share Report Abuse
Comments


Recent Judgments :

  1. Non-Supply of Field Visit Report Vitiates Rejection of Revocation Application
  2. Alternative Remedy before GSTAT to be Exhausted Despite Allegation that Adjudication Travelled Beyond SCN
  3. ITAT Jodhpur: AO Allows ₹2.61 Crore Deduction under Sections 54EC and 54F; Assessee's Appeal Dismissed as Infructuous
  4. CESTAT Revokes Suspension of Customs Broker Licence for Non-Compliance with Mandatory 15-Day Hearing Requirement
  5. ITAT Jodhpur: Penny Stock LTCG Cannot Be Treated as Bogus Merely on General Investigation Report
  6. CESTAT Allahabad Sets Aside ₹22.84 Crore Service Tax Demand Against HCL Infosystems
  7. CESTAT Delhi Holds LED Modules Classifiable Under CTH 8539; Rejects Department's Classification Under CTH 9405
  8. Incremental GST burden on pre-GST works contracts is recoverable only from the contracting employer and not from the State or tax authorities
  9. Time Spent in Pursuing Rectification Application under Section 161 of the CGST Act Excludible While Computing Limitation for Filing Appeal under Section 107
  10. Cancellation of GST registration based on defective verification reports fails the statutory test of 'reasons to believe’

View More Judgments »


Trending Online Classes

view all classess

CCI Pro
Meet our CAclubindia PRO Members
Pro Member prakash takaneprakash takanePro Member Sasidhar BSasidhar BPro Member CA Ajay TiwariCA Ajay TiwariPro Member Sabareesan S VenkateshSabareesan S VenkateshPro Member HemkumarHemkumar
Subscribe to Pro
Join an elite circle of professionals

Browse by Category