IT: Reopening of assessment on basis of valuation of godown constructed by assessee, by valuation cell could not be said to be without any basis
IT: If on any aspect of appeal, appellate forum is silent, it can be deemed to have concurred with view expressed by forum from which order under appeal has arisen and it would not be considered as mistake apparent from record
■■■
[2015] 53 taxmann.com 36 (Andhra Pradesh)
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Pothina Venkateswara Swamy*
v.
Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle, Vijayawada
L. NARASIMHA REDDY AND T. SUNIL CHOWDARY, JJ.
ITTA NOS. 125 & 126 OF 2002†
SEPTEMBER 5, 2014
Section 69B, read with section 147, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Undisclosed investments (Construction expenses) - Assessment year 1992-93 - Assessees jointly constructed a godown and showed certain cost of construction in their returns - Assessments were made accordingly - Thereafter, Assessing Officer reopened assessments on ground that valuation cell of department determined cost of construction at higher figure - He made addition under section 69B of amount of difference between cost of construction admitted in assessment and value determined by valuation cell - Whether reopening of assessment was justified - Held, yes [Para 7][In favour of revenue]
Section 254 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Appellate Tribunal - Powers of (Power to rectify mistake) - Assessment year 1992-93 - Whether Tribunal should be deemed to have taken into account every aspect of appeal that is placed before it, and if on any aspect of appeal appellate forum is silent, it can be deemed to have concurred with view expressed by forum from which order under appeal has arisen and it would not be deemed to be mistake apparent from record - Held, yes [Paras 11 & 13][In favour of revenue]
IT: If on any aspect of appeal, appellate forum is silent, it can be deemed to have concurred with view expressed by forum from which order under appeal has arisen and it would not be considered as mistake apparent from record
■■■
[2015] 53 taxmann.com 36 (Andhra Pradesh)
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Pothina Venkateswara Swamy*
v.
Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle, Vijayawada
L. NARASIMHA REDDY AND T. SUNIL CHOWDARY, JJ.
ITTA NOS. 125 & 126 OF 2002†
SEPTEMBER 5, 2014
Section 69B, read with section 147, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Undisclosed investments (Construction expenses) - Assessment year 1992-93 - Assessees jointly constructed a godown and showed certain cost of construction in their returns - Assessments were made accordingly - Thereafter, Assessing Officer reopened assessments on ground that valuation cell of department determined cost of construction at higher figure - He made addition under section 69B of amount of difference between cost of construction admitted in assessment and value determined by valuation cell - Whether reopening of assessment was justified - Held, yes [Para 7][In favour of revenue]
Section 254 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Appellate Tribunal - Powers of (Power to rectify mistake) - Assessment year 1992-93 - Whether Tribunal should be deemed to have taken into account every aspect of appeal that is placed before it, and if on any aspect of appeal appellate forum is silent, it can be deemed to have concurred with view expressed by forum from which order under appeal has arisen and it would not be deemed to be mistake apparent from record - Held, yes [Paras 11 & 13][In favour of revenue]
No comments:
Post a Comment