9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (5) TMI 3X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessment or oversight. Once it is found that the change in the method of accounting was knowingly allowed by the Income-tax Officer, it is not permissible for the Income-tax Officer, or his successor, to reopen the assessment at a later point of time under section 147(b) X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssory notes and pay or receive such amount of interest on the date of and up to the date of purchase or sale. The assessee was also adopting this method and it was being accepted by the income-tax authorities until the assessment year 1958-59. However, with effect from the assessment year 1959-60, the assessee changed its method of returning income with respect to the transactions in securities. I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... accounting was accepted and assessments made. However, in the course of the assessment proceedings relating to the assessment year 1963-64, the Income-tax Officer objected to this change. He also took the view that the excess amount realised from the transactions in securities constituted a revenue receipt and not a capital receipt. He made the assessment accordingly. Further, he sought to reopen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... foresaid reference. The High Court answered the question in favour of the Revenue purporting to follow and apply the principles enunciated by this court in Kalyanji Mavji v. CIT [1976] 102 ITR 287. We find ourselves unable to agree with the High Court. The facts stated above clearly disclose that the Income-tax Officer allowed the change in the method of accounting for the assessment years conce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
