9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (8) TMI 520X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the matter back to the CIT (A) to decide the matter afresh - in favour of assessee for statistical purposes. - ITA No.366/Mds/2012 - - - Dated:- 27-6-2012 - Dr. O.K. NARAYANAN, AND SHRI V.DURGA RAO, JJ. Appellant by : Mr. R.Kumar, Advocate Respondent by : Mr. Vikramaditya, JCIT O R D E R PER V.DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of CIT(A)-I, Coimbatore dated 13.12.2011 relevant to the assessment year 2005-06. 2. The facts in brief are that the assessee had filed its return of income for the year under consideration declaring total income of Rs.90,99,303/-. The assessment was completed under section 143(3) on 21.08.2007. Subsequently, the case was reopened and a noti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it cannot be allowed as revenue expenditure. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer has made addition. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before CIT(A). Before the CIT(A), the contention of the assessee was that the reopening was beyond four years and the original assessment was completed under section 143(3) by considering the same material and therefore, it amounts to change of opinion and therefore, reopening was bad in law. The CIT(A) after considering the explanation of the assessee observed that the assessee nowhere objected to issue notice under section 148 nor questioned the same before Assessing Officer. The only objection of the assessee before the Assessing Officer was to pass a speaking order. The CIT(A) further observed that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ubmitted a case law ALA Firm Vs. CIT 189 ITR 285, where the Supreme Court held that reassessment cannot be based on bare or mere change of opinion. The appellant nowhere objected to the issue of notice u/s.148 nor questioned the same. Even during the course of initiation of proceedings u/s.148, the appellant has not raised any objection before the Assessing Officer to pass a speaking order. It was only during the course of assessment proceedings, that too in the month of December, a letter dated 27.12.2010 was filed before the Assessing Officer where it stated that the proposed reassessment u/s.148 is not legally correct. 6. From the above order, we find that the CIT(A) without deciding the issue in its right perspective by simply saying ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
