Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s. Magppie Exports Versus Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-25 (1) , New Delhi

2016 (4) TMI 357 - ITAT DELHI

Reopening of assessment - Disallowance u/s 28 and 80HHC - Held that:- In the case in hand , the proceedings under section 147 of the Act were initiated by the Assessing Officer in view of the retrospective amendment to the provisions of sections 28 and 80HHC of the Act w.e.f. AY 98-99, by Taxation Laws Amendment Act, 2005, however, we find that the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Pawan Kumar Jain Vs. Union of India, [2014 (8) TMI 32 - DELHI HIGH COURT] following the judgment in the case .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

favour of assessee - ITA Nos. 4314 & 4315/Del/2010 - Dated:- 8-4-2016 - Sh. C. M. Garg, Judicial Member And Sh. O. P. Kant, Accountant Member For the Appellant : Sh. Salil Kapoor , Sanat Kapoor & Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Advocates For the Respondent : Sh. P. DAM Kanunjna, Sr. DR ORDER Per O. P. Kant, A. M. These two appeals of the assessee are directed against two separate orders of Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals)-XXIV, New Delhi for assessment years 2001-02 and 2002-03 respectively. The g .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

bitrarily in reopening the assessment u/s 147/148 of the I.T. Act. iii. That the learned Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax as well as learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) was not justified in reducing the deduction u/s 80HHC of the I.T. Act. iv. The assessee craves the right to add, delete, modify any one or more of the grounds of appeal at the time of hearing. 3. The facts in brief are that the assessee filed return of income on 20/09/2001 declaring income of ₹ 4,57,000/- after cla .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

llowed, and therefore after recording reasons to believe that income has escaped assessment, and after taking necessary approval from the Commissioner of Income Tax, a notice under section 148 of the Act was issued on 02/07/2007, however, no compliance was made by the assessee in this respect. The AO also sent a certified copy of reasons recorded for reopening the case on 7/11/2008 requesting the assessee to file the return as required under section 148 of the Act. Neither any reply nor any obje .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Income-tax(Appeals) upheld the reopening of assessment under section 147 of the Act following his own finding in assessment year 2002-03 inter alia mentioning that the assessee had neither filed any objection to notice under section 148 of the Act nor filed return of income in response to the notice. The Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax( Appeals) issued a show cause for enhancement of the disallowance in respect of deduction under section 80IA of the Act and after considering the submission of th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

The grounds No. 1 and 4 of the appeal are general in nature, and therefore not required to adjudicate upon by us. 6. In ground No. 2, the assessee has challenged reopening of the assessment under section 147/148 of the Act. 6.1 Before us, the Ld. Authorized Representative ( AR) of the assessee submitted that the reopening proceedings were not liable to be sustained because of following reasons: (a) since the original assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the Act, subsequent reopening .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts, and therefore reopening was not sustainable in view of the judgment of the Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of global signal cables (India) Private Limited vs. DCIT in writ petition number WPC No. 747/2014 dated 17th of October 2014;. (c) that there was no new tangible material before the Assessing Officer for reopening of the assessment. In support of the proposition, the learned AR relied on the judgment of the Hon ble Delhi High Cou .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ment in section 80HHC of the Act on the basis of which the case was reopened, has been held prospective by the Hon ble Courts in the case of Pawan Kumar Jain vs. Union of India reported in (2014) 46 taxmann.com 341 (Delhi) and CIT versus Awani Exports (2015) 58 taxmann.com 100 (SC) and and therefore the reason on the basis of which assessment was reopened did not survive and therefore proceedings under section 147 of the Act are not sustainable. 6.2 On the other hand, the Ld. Senior Departmental .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

M/s. Magpie Exports, PD-4B, Pitampura, Delhi -34 for the AY 2001-02. Return of income in this case was filed on 20.09.2011 declaring an income of ₹ 457,000/-. As per CA s certificate in form 10CCAC dated 19.09.2001, the assessee claimed deduction u/s 80HHC at ₹ 13662093/- and as per CA s certificate in form 10CCB dated 19.09.2001, it claimed deduction u/s 80IA at ₹ 4706365/-. The assessment in this case was completed u/s 143(3) on 25.03.2003 on total income of 477000/- and the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of profit and gains of the industrial undertaking or of a hotel in the case of an assessee is claimed and allowed under this section for any assessment year, deduction to the extent of such profits and gains shall not be allowed under any other provisions of this chapter under the heading C-Deduction in respect of certain income and shall in no case exceed the profits & gains of such eligible business of the undertaking or enterprise, as the case may be . In view of the above facts, the dedu .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

/- As regards assessee s claim of deduction u/s 80HHC on the amount of Duty entitlement of ₹ 126,37,196/-, it is stated that the Taxation Laws Amendment Act, 2005 has amended provisions of Section 28 & 80HHC w.e.f. AY 1998-99, as per section 28(iiid) any profit on the transfer of the Duty entitlement passbook scheme, being Duty Remission Scheme, under the Export & Import policy formulated and announced u/s 5 of the Foreign Trade (Development & Regulation) Act, 1922 would be pro .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

transfer of DEPB Licences but assessees having export turnover exceeding ₹ 10 Cr. would get this deduction only if the assessee has necessary and sufficient evidence to prove that a) He had an option to choose either the duty draw back or the DEPB Scheme or the Duty Free Replacement Certificate as the case may be, being Duty Remission Scheme, and b) The rate of Duty draw back credit attributable to the Custome Duty was higher than the rate of credit allowance under the DEPB Scheme or the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

; 37757080/- in which the assessee s claim of deduction u/s 80HHC on the amount of DEPB was not allowed as the assessee did not fulfill the said conditions in that year. The assessee would thus not fulfill the said conditions in A.Y. 2001-02 also. In view of these facts, the assessee firm is not entitled for deduction u/s 80HHC on the amount of said DEPB for the AY 2001-02 also. As regards Supervision Charges amounting to ₹ 10,000/-, the assessee firm is not entitled for deduction u/s 80HH .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

deduction u/s 80HHC of IT Act Export turnover as declared by the assessee 11,65,43,497/- Total turnover as declared by the assessee. 12,84,71,359/- DEPB as declared by the assessee 1,26,37,196/- Profit on sale of licence as declared by the assessee 3,54,367/- Profit of the business from export activity Profit u/s 28 as above 188,45,458/- Less: Deduction u/s 80IA as calculated above 47,11,364/- 141,64,094/- Less: Supervision charges & prior period income As discussed above 27,748/- 141,06,346 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

3/- 1,83,68,458/- Deduction allowed in excess (-) 4,999/- 1,16,78,783/- 1,16,73,784/- Income escaped assessment 1,16,73,784/- From the above calculation of deductions u/s 80IA & 80HHC, it is seen that the assessee has claimed excess deduction of ₹ 116,78,783/- u/s 80HHC of IT Act. Also income to the extent of ₹ 11673784/- has escaped assessment by reason of failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for its assessment for the AY 2 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

07. Thus, the notice under section 148 of the Act has been issued beyond 4 years from and of the end of relevant assessment year i.e. 2001- 02. The issue of notice under section 148 of the Act, where the assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the Act, has been restricted by the proviso below the main section, which is reproduced as under: Provided that where an assessment under sub-section(3) of section 143 or this section has been made for the relevant assessment year, no action shall .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ginal assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the Act, for issue of notice under section 148 of the Act beyond 4 years from the end of relevant assessment year, it is essential that the escapement of income is due to reason of failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for the assessment. 8.3 We find from the reasons recorded above that after going through the assessment records of the assessee for the year under consideration, the AO no .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he AO has mentioned that income to the extent of ₹ 1,16,73,784/- had escaped assessment by reason of failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for its assessment for the AY 2001-02, but we do not find any mention of the material facts which the assessee failed to disclose. In the absence of any such failure on the part of the assessee, the assessment for the year under consideration cannot be reopened. 8.4 In the case of Global Signal Cabl .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

assessment year. 8.5 In the facts of the case in hand also, the AO has not mentioned which was the material fact which was not disclosed by the assessee truly and fully, and thus respectfully following the finding of the Hon ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Global Signal Cables (India) Private Limited (supra), the reopening proceedings after expiry of 4 years from the relevant years are not valid as per law. 9.1 In support of the next proposition, that in absence of no new tangible .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

for claiming deduction under section 80HHC of the Act and made reassessment under section 147 of the Act. In the circumstances, the Hon ble jurisdictional High Court held that there was no fresh tangible material before the Assessing Officer, subsequent to the intimation issued under section 143(1) of the Act and the AO was not having any power of reviewing whatever concluded under section 143(1) proceedings of the Act. The relevant findings of the Hon ble High Court are as under: 15. In the pr .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the present case do confirm our apprehension about the harm that a less strict interpretation of the words reason to believe viz-a-viz in intimation issued under section 143(1) can cause to the tax resigm. There is no whisper in the reasons recorded, of any tangible material which came to the possession of the Assessing Officer subsequent to the issue of the intimation. It reflects and arbitrary exercise of the power conferred under section 147. 16. For the above reason, we answer the substanti .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ing of the Tribunal in the case of Moti Lal R Todi (supra) is reproduced as under: 6.19. In the present case, it has already been discussed that admitted facts are that there was no fresh material coming into the possession of the AO, at the time of recording of the Reasons . These facts have not been rebutted by Ld DR also. The case law relied upon by Ld DR in the case of Dr. Amin s Pathology, supra is not applicable on the issue being decided here. The issue that in absence of any fresh materi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

heir lordships that external facts or material constitute the driver, or the key which enables the AO to http://www.itatonline.org 18 Motilal R. Todi legitimately reopen the completed assessment and in absence of this objective trigger , the AO does not possess jurisdiction to reopen the assessment. Further, most importantly, it was held by the Hon ble High Court that it is at the next stage when the question, whether the reopening of assessment amounts to review or change of opinion arises. In .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

se in hand, we find from the reasons recorded that there was no fresh tangible material before the Assessing Officer. In the circumstances respectfully following the Hon ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Orient Craft (supra) and the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Moti Lal R Todi (supra), the reassessment proceedings under section 147 of the Act in the case of the assessee are not justifiable, illegal and bad in law. 10.1 On the perusal of the reasons, we also find that the as .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e assessee was not eligible for deduction under section 80 HHC, in view of the retrospective amendment made to the said provision by the 2005 amendment, and that loss from export of trading goods was to be set off against profits from export of manufactured goods in view of the judgment of the Hon ble Apex Court. In response to the question raised by the revenue whether the retrospective amendment of law and subsequent judgement of the Apex Court after filing of the return of income and completi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the amendment and the judgement relied upon by the Assessing Officer was subsequent to the finalisation of the assessment proceeding. It is trite law that subsequent amendments are subsequent interpretation of the statute is not a ground to reopen concluded transactions. Admittedly the assessment had been completed under section 143(3) of the Act and in order to reopen the same, necessarily it has to be done within a period of 4 years…… 10.2 Similarly, the Hon ble High Court of Gu .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

under section 80-IA would not be admissible to an assessee who carried on business which was in the nature of works contract, held that there was no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for each assessment and in the circumstances the very initiation of proceeding under section 147 stood vitiated and as such could not be sustained. 11.1 In the case in hand , the proceedings under section 147 of the Act were initiated by the Assessing Offic .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Hon ble High Court in the case of Pawan Kumar Jain (supra) are reproduced as under: 2. It would be evident from prayer (a) itself that essentially the petitioner is challenging the retrospectivity of the amendments to Section 80 HHC brought about by the Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act'). This issue was considered by the Gujarat High Court in the case of Avani Exports v.CIT [2012] 348 ITR 391/23 taxmann.com 62/209 Taxman 59 (Mag.) which set a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

available to the assessees whose assessments have already been concluded. In other words, in this type of substantive amendment, retrospective operation can be given only if it is for the benefit of the assessee but not in a case where it affects even a fewer section of the assesses. 27. We, accordingly, quash the impugned amendment only to this extent that the operation of the said section could be given effect from the date of amendment and not in respect of earlier assessment years of the as .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the Gujarat High Court, prayer (a) of the writ petition has to be allowed. 4. It is ordered accordingly. 5. In view of the fact that we have allowed prayer (a) to the extent that the amendment brought about by introducing the 2nd, 3rd and 4th proviso to Section 80 HHC (3) (c) is to operate only prospectively and not retrospectively, the other prayers which are in the nature of consequential reliefs also stand allowed. 11.2. In the case of Avani Export(supra), the matter was carried to Hon ble S .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

eeded. However, to make the position crystal clear, we substitute the direction of the High Court with the following direction: "Having seen the twin conditions and since 80HHC benefit is not available after 1.4.05, we are satisfied that cases of exporters having a turnover below and those above 10 cr. Should be treated similarly. This order is in substitution of the judgment in Appeal." 11.3. In view of the above facts, we find that the reason on the basis of which the notice under se .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

iod of 4 years from the end of the relevant assessment year, the proceedings of reopening under section 147 of the Act are without jurisdiction and not sustainable. Accordingly, we quash the proceedings under section 147 of the Act in the case of the assessee for the year under consideration. Thus ground No. 2 of the appeal is allowed. 13. As we have already quashed the assessment order proceedings completed under section 147 of the Act, ground No. 3 of the appeal is not adjudicated at this stag .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version