Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961- Reassessment - Reopening invalid as reason for reopening was not available for verification and AO relied on the very same material which were available on record and which were duly considered by the earlier AO, while framing original assessment .

Facts: Whether appellate authorities were correct in holding that reopening of assessments was barred by limitation in view of proviso to s. 147 as the assessee has disclosed the claim of depreciation in respect of boiler and turbine and other assets in the return filed by the assessee ? and (ii) Whether the appellate authorities were correct in not taking into consideration s. 149 prescribing limitation as the assessee had failed to disclose that the said assets over which depreciation was claimed was not utilized in the course of its business as the same was being set-up during the current assessment year and therefore the reopening was fully justified ?"

Held, that Tribunal observed that the reason for reopening was not available for verification and AO relied on the very same material which were available on record and which were duly considered by the earlier AO, while framing original assessment . Thus, in terms of proviso to s. 147, no action can be taken beyond the period of 4 years from the end of relevant assessment year, when the original assessment is completed under s. 143(3). The proviso declares that where the original assessment was made under s. 143(3), after scrutiny of the records, no action shall be taken after the expiry of 4 years from the end of relevant assessment year, unless the case attracts the exceptions provided by proviso to s. 147. It is not the case of the AO that material facts were either not disclosed or even after the same were sought for, were not furnished, and no new facts have been brought on record by the AO. Revenue has disclosed fully and truly all the material facts necessary for the assessment by way of disclosing the hire income for the boiler and turbine and the interest cum income on deposits on share application money as well as claiming depreciation in respect of hired out boiler and turbine and by way of furnishing necessary documents before the AO. The CIT(A) and the Tribunal, after considering the material on record have rightly held that notice under s. 148 is bad in law as the same is not in accordance with the provisions of s. 147. After considering the entire material on record, we answer the substantial questions of law in favour of the assessee. Appeal disposed off accordingly. - CIT V/s I.G. PETROCHEMICALS LTD. - [2020] 314 CTR 857 (KARN)