TMI Blog2015 (2) TMI 803X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... owing the same. The objection of the Revenue that there was no opinion formed during the original assessment proceeding as the order dated April 29, 2003, did not deal with the same is unsustainable. The mere fact that the assessment order does not discuss the issue of deduction under section 80-IA(4) of the Act would not lead to the conclusion that the Assessing Officer had made no opinion with regard to the issue. The Tribunal has reached a finding of fact that the question with regard to the claim for deduction under section 80-IA of the Act was raised by the Assessing Officer and responded to by the respondent-assessee. This position is also not disputed by the Revenue. Merely because the issue is not discussed in the assessment ord ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessment as invalid and bad in law when the Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. P. V. S. Beedies P. Ltd. reported in [1999] 237 ITR 13 (SC) has held the reopening of assessment on the basis of a factual error pointed out by the internal audit party as valid ? 2. The respondent-assessee was originally assessed under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ( the Act ) for the assessment year 2001-02 by order dated April 29, 2003, to an income of ₹ 63.84 lakhs. This was after, inter alia, allowing a deduction under section 80-IA of the said Act of ₹ 26.73 lakhs in computing the income on account of its windmill project. 3. Thereafter, by notice dated July 25, 2005, under section 147/148 of the said Act, the Assessing Offi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al by the impugned order dated October 8, 2010, held that the reopening of the assessment for the assessment year 2001-02 was bad in law. This was on account of the fact that the reopening of assessment was sought on a mere change of opinion. The impugned order holds that the Assessing Officer had during the course of the original assessment proceeding leading to the order dated April 29, 2003, had specifically enquired into the claim of the respondent-assessee for deduction on account of the windmill project made under section 80-IA(4) of the said Act. 5. The Revenue's grievance with regard to the impugned order of the Tribunal is that there is no change of opinion as the original assessment order dated April 29, 2003, of the Assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Act, the first round of the assessment proceedings, however, there is no prevention in the Income-tax Act of reopening of the assessment on the issues dis cussed earlier in the scrutiny proceedings under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act. 7. From the above ground itself, it is clear that the Revenue does not dispute the fact that the issue with regard to which the reopening is sought to be done was the subject matter of discussion and deliberation before the Assessing Officer during the original proceedings leading to the order dated April 29, 2003. In these circumstances, it is an undisputed position that the Assessing Officer did have occasion to apply his mind to the deduction claimed by the respondent-assessee before allowing the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
