TMI Blog2014 (12) TMI 1198X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r to review completed assessment merely on the ground that its difference of opinion can be formed. Without there being any tangible material such a completed assessment cannot be reopened. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. (2010 (1) TMI 11 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA) has categorically held that merely on the “change of opinion”, the assessment completed cannot be reopened thus the finding of the Ld.CIT(A) has noted above has based on settled legal proposition and accordingly the same is confirmed. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No. 1568/Mum/2013 - - - Dated:- 19-12-2014 - SHRI D. KARUNAKAR RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER For the Appellant : Shri K.K. Ve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of intangible asset interest charges written off for HVDC Project written off Since intangible asset is a capital asset, interest on intangible asset is also capital in nature and required to be capitalized and cannot be claimed as revenue expenditure. Omission on the part of the assessee to capitalize such expenditure has resulted in under assessment of income to the tune of ₹ 1,07,15,744/-. 3. Before the assessing officer, the assessee objected to such a reopening which has been rejected by the AO. He thus made an addition of ₹ 1,07,15,744/- after observing and holding as under:- The above explanation of the assessee is not found to be satisfactory for said expenses consist of intangible assets interest charges writt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ded in para-3 of the assessment order. The perusal of the reasons recorded by the A.O. clearly denotes that the reopening was done based on appellant's record, which was filed before A.O. during original assessment proceedings. It is nowhere the case that the appellant has not disclosed any particulars or has filed-any inaccurate particular of its , income. The reasons recorded is merely forming a different opinion, looking to detail and records filed by the appellant with the return of income. Further the case laws relied upon by the appellant in the case of CIT VS. Shri Amitabh Bachchan in ITA No.4646 of 2010, which also support the contention of the MIs MSEB-05-06 appellant, as I find that the jurisdictional Bombay High Court has cle ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e has been completed u/s 143(3) vide order 31.12.2007. Such an assessment has been sought to be reopened without any new material coming on record having live link nexus with the income chargeable to tax having escape assessment. From the perusal of the reasons recorded from the it can be seen that the AO is noting the facts from the accounts of the assessee that amount debited under the head sundry expenses on account of intangible assets interest charges return off for HVDC project. He held such an expenditure has to be treated as capital expenditure. Such a reasons definitely amount to change of opinion as the final account was very much available and examined by the AO at the time of the passing of the original assessment proceedings. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
