TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 1166X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the course of original assessment. Not only that the entire transaction was disclosed in the notes to the accounts of the annual report. The AO's reasoning in reopening can only be considered as change of opinion. Moreover, all the facts were disclosed by assessee and therefore, there is no failure on the part of assessee in disclosing fully and truly all material facts. Therefore, we are of the opinion that reopening of the assessment after four years from the end of the assessment year cannot be justified. - Decided against revenue. - ITA No. 288/Hyd/2014 - - - Dated:- 30-6-2015 - B. Ramakotaiah, AM And Asha Vijayaraghavan, JM, JJ. For the Appellant : Shri B V Gopinath, DR For the Respondent : Shri KA Sai Prasad, AR ORD ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng fully and truly all material facts and further, AO did enquire about the above amounts vide letter dt. 07-03-2007 in the course of original assessment. b. As there is no failure on the part of assessee, reopening after four years from the end of the assessment year is bad in law. With reference to the addition u/s. 41(1), it was submitted that assessee has never claimed any interest as there were no returns filed in earlier years and even if returns were to be filed, the amounts could have been disallowed u/s. 43B. Therefore, there should not be any satisfaction to be recorded before reopening the assessment. Ld.CIT(A) after giving due opportunity to assessee and obtaining Remand Report decided the issue not only on the reopening b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Income Tax Act. There is no bar on the appellant to maintain its accounts. Therefore, taxing the waiver of this interest in the current year is not valid as the same was never allowed as a deduction to the appellant 6.6 I do not find any difference between the facts and circumstances of the case for the assessment year now under appeal, i.e., AY. 2005-06 and the AY. 2003-04. Only unpaid interest was waived by the financial institutions. The question of allowing such an interest would not have arisen even if a claim is made by the Appellant in an earlier assessment in view of the embargo in Section 43B. 6.7 The Income tax Appellate Tribunal, on appeal by the Department, set aside the order for the assessment year 2003-04, to veri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 56 vide letter dt. 07-03-2007. Therefore, the waiver of interest by IDBI/ICICI Bank is very much within the knowledge of the AO who has enquired the same in the course of original assessment. Not only that the entire transaction was disclosed in the notes to the accounts of the annual report. The AO's reasoning in reopening can only be considered as change of opinion. Moreover, all the facts were disclosed by assessee and therefore, there is no failure on the part of assessee in disclosing fully and truly all material facts. Therefore, we are of the opinion that reopening of the assessment after four years from the end of the assessment year cannot be justified. 7. Even on merits, there is no dispute with reference to the fact that a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e unable to understand why Revenue has preferred the present appeal for AY. 2005-06 vide the appeal dt. 21-02-2014, when this particular issue was decided on merits and there is no scope for addition in the assessments. Coming in appeal on only legal principle of reopening which itself also factually cannot be supported, is not warranted and unnecessary. This shows the non-application of mind not only by the AO but also by the CIT, who approved the second appeal to the ITAT. This sort of infructuous appeals burden the ITAT un-necessarily and puts pressure on assessee with un-necessary litigation. We wish that Revenue will apply its mind and does not prefer appeals which are infructuous. There is no order as to costs. 10. With these direc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|