9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Validity of reopening assessment under section 147(b) based on audit department's objection. 2. Disallowance of extra shift allowance on certain machinery and installations. 3. Time-barred reassessment under section 147(b) and applicability of section 144B. Analysis: Issue 1: Validity of reopening assessment under section 147(b) The appeal concerned the validity of reopening the assessment under section 147(b) based on the objection raised by the audit department. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the reopening, stating that the ITO rightly disallowed the extra shift allowance on specific machinery and installations. The Tribunal, after considering the arguments, rejected the contention that the assessment could not be reopened based on the audit department's objection. It distinguished the case from Indian & Eastern Newspaper Society v. CIT, emphasizing that the ITO had not considered the relevant provisions during the original assessment. The Tribunal concluded that the ITO was justified in reopening the assessment under section 147(b) upon receiving new information, thus rejecting the objection raised by the assessee. Issue 2: Disallowance of extra shift allowance Regarding the disallowance of extra shift allowance on certain machinery and installations, the Tribunal partly accepted the appeal. It ruled that the assessee was not entitled to the allowance on transformers, switchboard panels, and certain stationery plants. However, the Tribunal allowed the claim for extra shift allowance on diesel generating sets and H.T. cubicles based on a previous decision. Additionally, it allowed the claim on power cables, citing a decision by the Madras High Court. The Tribunal directed the ITO to calculate the exact amount allowable to the assessee in light of these findings. Issue 3: Time-barred reassessment and applicability of section 144B The assessee raised an additional ground regarding the time-barred reassessment under section 147(b) and the applicability of section 144B. The Tribunal rejected the argument that section 144B did not apply to reassessments under section 147. It relied on the decision in Bela Singh Pabla v. ITO, stating that section 144B applies to all assessments under section 143(3), including those resulting from reopening under section 147. The Tribunal disagreed with the interpretation of the Orissa High Court's decision cited by the assessee, emphasizing that the Special Bench of the Tribunal had directly addressed the issue. Consequently, the Tribunal held that the reassessment order was not time-barred and rejected the objection raised by the assessee. In conclusion, the Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, upholding the reopening of assessment under section 147(b, making specific rulings on the disallowance of extra shift allowance on certain machinery and installations, and determining the reassessment was not time-barred under section 144B.
|
