TMI Blog2016 (6) TMI 971X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Shri Ganesh Bare-DR For the Assessee : Shri Farrokh V. Irani-AR ORDER Per Rajendra, AM Challenging the order dt. 04. 10. 2012 of CIT(A)-4, Mumbai, the assessee has filed the present appeal. Assessee-company, engaged in the business of servicing and maintenance of vehicles, filed its return of income 05. 01. 2006, declaring total income at Nil . The assessment order u/s. 143(3) r. w. s. 147 of the Act, was passed on 3. 12. 2008, determining the total income of the assessee at ₹ 58, 53, 770/-. 2. First Ground of appeal deals with validity of reassessment proceedings. We find that the AO had reopened the case after recording the reasons. The reasons recorded by him read as under: (i) During the F. Y. 1999-2000 (A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the Assessing Officer has resulted in escapement of income. 3. The assessee objected to reopening before the AO. However, he held that notice u/s. 148 of the Act was issued as per the provisions of the Act. Before the First Appellate Authority (FAA), it was contended that original assessment was made u/s. 143(3) of the Act, that set off of brought forward losses had already been allowed, that the income was computed at Nil and was assessed at book profit u/s. 115JB of the Act, it was merely change of opinion. After considering the submission of the assessee and assessment order the FAA held that in the case under consideration there was a mistake in the original assessment order, that wrong claim was allowed, that relevant details ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ealed . . The note clearly shows that the AO had re-appraised the facts available on record and no new material had been considered before issuing the notice u/s. 148 of the Act. We find that vide his letter dated 24. 11. 2005, the assessee had mentioned that the premises of the company were to be utilised for undertaking business of servicing/maintaining of vehicles, that pending finalisation feasibility report the premises were let out to M/s. Tata Motors Ltd. for the purpose of servicing/maintenance of vehicles (Pg-42 of the PB). Vide its letter dated 28. 11. 2005, (Pg-46 of PB), the assessee had enclosed a copy of leave and license agreement, dt. 11. 10. 2002 entered into between Mini Car India Ltd. and Tata Motors Ltd. It is also f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... laimed exemption in respect of its dividend and the proportionate management and administrative expenses attributable to the dividend income were not deducted in computing admissible exemption and the said mistake had resulted in underassessment of income and as a result there was a short levy of tax including interest and the re-opening was proposed in accordance with section 14A of the Act. The FAA and the Tribunal held that the reassessment was not valid. Dismissing the appeal filed by the Department, the Hon ble High Court held as under: The assessment of the assessee for the assessment year 2005-06 was completed under section 143(3)of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Assessing Officer subsequently reopened the assessment on the ground ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was a tax resident of the U. S. A. During the relevant financial years, it derived income from the grant of exclusive rights to TIIPL in India to sell advertising on the products and to distribute certain products. It filed its returns for the assessment years 2007-08 and 2008-09. The assessments were made and the AO in the assessment orders had referred to the mutual agreement to avoid double taxation under article 27 of Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement between India and the U. S. A, for the AY. s. 2001-02 to 2004-05 and the fact that subsequently for the AY. 2005-06, assessment was concluded following the mutual agreement procedure. The AO in the assessment order had specifically recorded that since the facts of the year under conside ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the issue was examined but the Assessing Officer did not find any ground or reason to make addition or reject the stand of the assessee. He forms an opinion. The reassessment will be invalid because the Assessing Officer had formed an opinion in the original assessment, whether or not he had recorded his reasons in the assessment order. that no fresh information or material had been referred to in the reasons recorded for seeking to reopen the assessment. The material that was referred to was the very same material that was already before the Assessing Officer at the time of framing of the assessments under section 143(3) of the Act and even the reasons recorded that from the perusal of the assessment record, it is observed that . Thi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
