26AS with its dynamic character may see changes post filing of income tax return and such changes may lead to reopening of assessments upto ten years which is what happened in 18 ITR-OL 563 (Mad).
In this case the taxpayer who approached the AO for rectification after his scrutiny for grant of certain TDS was slapped with section 148 notice for certain additional receipts and unclaimed TDS found in the fresh 26AS download.
The Court held that any mismatch of accounts with 26AS undoubtedly was a tangible material to form an opinion that the income had escaped assessment.
In this situation to hold that the assessee had not made full and true disclosure of all material facts during the original assessment may not be justifiable due to TDS variations in 26AS alone which is beyond taxpayers control. Any changes in 26AS subsequent to date of filing of return cannot be viewed adversely against the taxpayer so as to invite reopening.
Instead for any delayed deduction/ filings of TDS which have lead to variations or mismatches in taxpayers 26AS account may be inquired from the deductor who may be imposed with interest nd penalty.
Any changes/correction filing in TDS in 26AS subsequent to filing of due date of return should not owe any duty upon the taxpayer to revise taxes.
In this case there was a large value discrepancy and mismatch in more than one year in sequence but that by itself cannot constitute additional materials so to say requiring a reopening.
Moreover only section 143 in the alone provide authorisation to make addition of stand alone incomes appearing in Form 26AS or Form 16A or Form 16 which have not been included in computing the total income in the return. These three forms would be those that are in custody of the taxpayer at the time of furnishing of return. Even so any contractual receipts as in the reported case cannot be counted as incomes simplicitor by any means .
This 26AS wise reopenings are likely to cause great hardships upon taxpayers and must therefore be managed within certain band or time.