| |
| The Tax Publishers2020 TaxPub(DT) 2852 (Mad-HC) : (2020) 273 TAXMAN 0322 INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 147
Issue being the subject matter of reassessment had been duly considered while framing original assessment under section 143(3) and in revisionery proceedings under section 263 and, therefore, reopening on the very same issue amounted to mere change of opinion being not sustianable in law.
|
Reassessment - Validity - Change of opinion - Concerned issued duly considered while framing original assessment under section 143(3) and in revisionery proceedings under section 263
AO reopened the assessment stating that income escaped assessment since assessee claimed depreciation on block of assets -- water supply and drainage at 15% and the said asset was shown separately and not in the plant and machinery and, therefore, depreciation on water supply and drainage was to be restricted to 10% only.Held: The very same reasons were put against the assessee during assessment under section 143(3) and the assessee had given their reply. Thereafter, assessment was completed and subsequently, the notice under section 263 was issued wherein one of the issues related to depreciation claim, for which, the assessee submitted their reply and that the Commissioner, LTU passed the Order, dropping the proceedings. It was thereafter the notice under section 148 of the Act came to be issued for the very same reasons and therefore, it was a clear case of change of opinion and, therefore, reassessment was not valid.
Applied:CIT, Delhi v. M/s. Kelvinator of India Limited (2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC) : 2010 TaxPub(DT) 1335 (SC)
REFERRED :
FAVOUR : In assessee's favour.
A.Y. : 2008-09
 SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT
|