Atma Ram Properties Pvt Ltd vs. DCIT (Delhi High Court)

Atma Ram Properties Pvt Ltd vs. DCIT (Delhi High Court)

S. 147: AO must specify what facts are failed to be disclosed. Lapse by AO no ground for reopening if primary facts disclosed

In AY 2001-02, the AO assessed advances of Rs. 1.56 crores received from a group concern as “deemed dividend” u/s 2(22)(e). In appeal, the CIT (A) held that the advances received in earlier years could not be assessed. The AO thereafter reopened the assessment for AY 1999-00 (after 4 years from the end of the AY). Though the AO alleged that there was a failure on the part of the assessee to disclose full and true material facts, he did not specify what that failure was. The reopening was upheld by the CIT (A) & the Tribunal. On appeal to the High Court, HELD allowing the appeal: