assessee sold immovable property resulting in capital loss - On basis of valuation made by sub-registrar, Assessing Officer issued notice to assessee for adoption of higher sale value of property - In response to said notice, assessee submitted revised computation of income showing increased selling price to assessee - Assessing Officer accepted said valuation and completed assessment - Subsequently, he initiated re-assessment proceeding on ground that certain long-term capital gain arising out from sale of property escaped assessment - Whether mere fact that in response to notice issued by Assessing Officer, assessee had filed revised computation of income, not revised return of income, therefore it could not be ground to reopen assessment - Held, yes - Whether, moreover, assessee had disclosed all relevant facts at time of assessment, initiation of re-assessment proceedings after expiry of 4 years, from relevant year, merely on basis of change of opinion was not sustainable

Chandrakant Keshavram Singapuri [2015] 60 taxmann.com 136 (Gujarat) MARCH  11, 2015 

Learned advocate appearing for the revenue has heavily relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT [2006] 284 ITR 323/157 Taxman 1 in support of his submission that the assessee was required to submit the revised return of income and mere submitting revised computation of income was not permissible.

Held by the Court that - May be the method adopted by the assessee was not correct. He ought to have submitted the revised return of income. However, by that itself, cannot confer the jurisdiction on the Assessing Officer to initiate the reassessment proceedings and/or reopen the assessment in exercise of powers under section 147 of the Act beyond the period of four years, unless and until the assessee did not truly and fully disclosed the material fact, which was necessary for the purpose of assessment.