9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (2) TMI 1228X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... material and constitutes a mere change of opinion of the AO. In view of the Petitioner's succeeding in the second point, the Court does not consider it necessary to examine the effect of non-compliance by the Department of the mandatory requirement of the law explained by the Supreme Court in GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. [ 2002 (11) TMI 7 - SUPREME COURT] . The impugned assessment order and the consequential demand notice are hereby quashed. The writ petition is allowed. - W.P.(C) No. 25229 of 2017 - - - Dated:- 15-2-2022 - THE CHIEF JUSTICE R.K. PATTANAIK For the Appellant : Mr. Sidhartha Ray, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. T.K. Satapathy, Senior Standing Counsel ORDER 1. The Petitioner questions an asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eme Court of India in GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. v. Income Tax Officer [2003] 259 ITR 19 (SC) the assessment proceedings and the consequential order are bad in law. Secondly, on merits he contends that the reopening was based merely on a change of opinion and therefore was unsustainable in law. In support of the submissions, he placed reliance on the decision in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Kelvinator of India Ltd. (2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC) and the judgment of this Court in Viresh Hemani v. Income Tax Officer (2021) 435 ITR 376 (Ori) and the order dated 3rd January, 2022 in W.P.(C) No.16139 of 2016 (Sri Laxmi Narayan Agency v. The Income Tax Officer, Angul). 5. Appearing on behalf of the Department (Opposite Party), Mr. T.K. Satapathy, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Department, then, in the grab of reopening the assessment, review would take place. One must treat the concept of change of opinion as an in-built test to check abuse of power by the Assessing Officer. 7. Consequently, this Court is unable to sustain the impugned assessment order since in the considered view of the Court it is not based on any new material and constitutes a mere change of opinion of the AO. 8. In view of the Petitioner's succeeding in the second point, the Court does not consider it necessary to examine the effect of noncompliance by the Department of the mandatory requirement of the law explained by the Supreme Court in GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. (supra). The impugned assessment order and the consequent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
