9911796707
TMI Blog1974 (5) TMI 17X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in 1949. The assessment years concerned are 1959-60 and 1960-61. For the assessment year 1959-60, the liquidator filed return of income showing interest received to the extent of Rs. 16,800. As against this income the liquidator claimed expenses in respect of salary, postage, travelling, etc., to the extent of Rs. 13,499. For the assessment year 1960-61, the liquidator filed return showing interes ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y. The assessee went up in appeal but failed. Then the assessee carried the dispute to the Tribunal. The Tribunal held that on facts it has not been established by the department that the Income-tax Officer who made the original assessment did not apply his mind to the admissibility of the expenses. This was so because the assessment was completed under section 23(3) of the Act. The mere fact that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wing question of law for the opinion of this court : " Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that a mere change of opinion led to the reopening of the assessment for the assessment years 1959-60 and 1960-61 and that such change of opinion would not amount to information within the meaning of section 147(b) of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... his mind afresh to the same problem came to a different conclusion. The conclusion reached as a result of fresh application of mind by the successor officer will not amount to information within the meaning of clause (b) of section 147 of the Act. Learned counsel for the department invited our attention to Commissioner of Income-tax v. Rathinasabapathy Mudaliar. A Bench of the Madras High Court ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rly distinguishable. In the present case the Income-tax Officer had considered the expenses claimed by the liquidator and had come to the conclusion that they were admissible. It is not a case where the relevant income or the expenses were not within the knowledge of the officer. Our answer to the question referred to us is in the affirmative, in favour of the assessee and against the deparment. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
