9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (8) TMI 829X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Assessing Officer, at the time of original assessment and therefore, it is not possible to infer that the AO had not at all applied his mind. The Supreme Court in TECHSPANINDIAS PVT LTD [ 2018 (4) TMI 1376 - SUPREME COURT] has held that the use of the words reason to believe in Section 147 has to be interpreted schematically as the liberal interpretation of the word would have the consequence of conferring arbitrary powers on the assessing officer who may even initiate such re-assessment proceedings merely on his change of opinion on the basis of same facts and circumstances which has already been considered by him during the original assessment proceedings. As evident that the Assessing Officer, on perusal of the record ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing any opinion on the claim made by the assessee and also as per the provisions of Section 147 of the Act and recorded a perverse finding? 2. Facts leading to filing of this appeal briefly stated are that the assessee is a company and is engaged in the business of printing currency notes. The assessee filed the return of income for the Assessment Year 2005-06 on 28.10.2005 and declared a total income of ₹ 62,48,47,870/- The return was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act on 31.10.2006 and a refund of ₹ 27,06,17,046/- was issued. Subsequently, the return filed by the assessee was selected for scrutiny and a notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was issued on 25.09.2006. The Assessing Officer scrutinized the details f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the assessee was allowed. In the aforesaid factual background, this appeal has been filed. 3. Learned counsel for the revenue submitted that proceedings for re-assessment were initiated under Section 147 of the Act which was in existence at the relevant time and the power under Section 147 could be invoked provided the Assessing Officer had reason to believe that any income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment. It is further submitted that in the instant case, the Assessing Officer had not formed any opinion and the Tribunal therefore erred in setting aside the proceeding for re-assessment on the principle of change of opinion. It is further submitted that the Tribunal ought to have appreciated that mere disclosure of the mater ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o be amortized and therefore, the premium paid on the Government securities is required to be allowed. Even though the same may be under a different head yet it will have any tax impact on the total income. In support of aforesaid submission, reliance has been placed on the decision of the Supreme Court in CIT VS KELVINATOR OF INDIA LTD (2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC), CIT VS KELVINATOR OF INDIA LTD (2002) 256 ITR 1 (DEL), CIT VS USHA INTERNATIONAL LTD (2012) 348 ITR 485 (DEL), ALA FIRM VS CIT (1991) 189 ITR 673 (KAR), DELL INDIA (P) LTD. VS JCIT (2021) 123 TAXMANN.COM 468 (KAR),ORACLE INDIA (P) LTD VS ACIT (2017) 397 ITR 480, BANKIPUR CLUB LTD VS CIT (1971) 82 ITR 439 (KAR) 5. We have considered the submissions made on both sides and have ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sh facts or materials or without any enquiry into the materials which form part of the original assessment, Section 34(1)(b) would have no application. A Full Bench of this Court in 'DELL INDIA PVT. LTD. Vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BANGALORE' (2021) 123 TAXMANN.COM 468 (KAR) dealt with the question whether 'reason to believe' in the context of Section 147 of the Income Tax Act can be based on mere change of opinion of the Assessing Officer and answered the reference as follows: 17. Thus, what is held by the Apex Court is that when a power under Section 147 is to be exercised, concept of change of opinion must be treated as an inbuilt test to check abuse of power of the Assessing Officer. Further, it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tment in government securities viz., ₹ 8,75,99,696/- and premium written off during financial year 2004-05 viz., ₹ 3,84,40,542/-. The aforesaid return was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act on 31.03.2006. The return thereafter was selected for scrutiny and the Assessing Officer passed an original order of assessment dated 27.07.2007. Thus, the details were placed before the Assessing Officer, at the time of original assessment and therefore, it is not possible to infer that the Assessing Officer had not at all applied his mind. The Supreme Court in TECHSPANINDIAS PVT LTD supra has held that the use of the words reason to believe in Section 147 has to be interpreted schematically as the liberal interpretation of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
