TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 1376X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4] and thereafter, after scrutiny not made any disallowance for interest income forming part of such larger claim, the principle of change of opinion would apply. Once the Assessing Officer rejected the claim of deduction under Section 80IA [4] in its entirety, there was thereafter no occasion and any need for him to dissect such claim for rejection on some additional ground. AO thereafter cannot re-visit such a claim and seek to disallow part thereof. This would be contrary to the principle of merger statutorily provided and judicially recognized. Even after the Commissioner [Appeals] allow such a claim and the Revenue was of the opinion that he has not processed it and committed an error, it was always open for the Revenue to carry the matter in appeal. At any rate, reopening of the assessment would simply not be permissible. Reassessment carries an entirely different connotation. Once an assessment is reopened, the same gives wider jurisdiction to the AO to examine the claims which had been formed part of the reasons recorded, but which were not originally concluded. - Decided in favour of assessee. - Special Civil Application No. 16163 of 2017 - - - Dated:- 19-2-2018 - MR ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iew of the above, it was not to be considered for the purpose of deduction under Section 80IA of the Act. Thus, deduction so allowed on the interest income is not allowable. Hence, same is required to be disallowed, as same is claimed against the provision of law. Hence, the assessee company concealed the income of ₹ 57,01,229/=. In view of the above facts, I have reason to believe that the assessee has concealed the income to the extent of ₹ 57,01,229/= which is an escaped assessment within the meaning of Section 147 of the Act. Thus, it is a fit case for issuing Notice u/s. 148 of the Act. The petitioner raised objections to the notice of reopening under a letter dated 6th July 2017. Its objections were rejected by the Assessing Officer by an Order dated 31st July 2017. Hence, this petition. Taking us through the materials on record, counsel for the petitioner raised the following contentions : [i] there was no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose truly and fully all material facts necessary for assessment. Notice of reopening which has been issued beyond the period of four years from the end of relevant assessment year was therefore invalid. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... same after due bifurcation for the respective units which you have claimed deduction under section 80IA. You are further requested to justify your claim under Section80IA [4] and furnish the copies of various agreements in regard to the units in respect of whom deduction under Section 80IA is claimed. 3. Complete details and evidence in regard to interest income of ₹ 2,00,86,970/= may please be submitted mentioning name of the person to whom loans are given, date of transaction, copy of bank statement through which such loans were advanced, rate of interest at which interest is calculated and ledger of accounts thereto. The assessee filed a detailed reply to the said communication of the Assessing Officer on 16th February 2013. In such communication, in addition to justifying the claim of deduction under Section 80IA [4] of the Act, the assessee made the following disclosures with respect to the interest income of ₹ 2 Crores [rounded off] : Sr. No . Unit Name of Person to whom interest Given Interest Amount Rate of Interest A. Interest on Uns ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ,492,501 Interest on FDR for Business 4,208,728 Total: 5701229 5701229 Total Interest Income for Gabheni Unit 20086970 As regards evidence of income, copy of party ledger from our books of account alongwith the Bank statement tracing out transaction with above mentioned person is enclosed, marked Annexure C . Statement showing FDR wise interest income and eligible for 80IA is also enclosed. The above quoted portion of the assessee's reply to the Assessing Officer would show that out of the total interest income of ₹ 2 Crores, the assessee had attributed a sum of ₹ 57.07 lakhs [rounded off] as business income. It is this claim of the assessee of the interest income of ₹ 57.07 lakhs, as being part of its business income which is a focal point of the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer for reopening the assessment. He contends that the interest income cannot be treated as arising out of the assessee's business, and therefore, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reafter comment on a part of such claim relatable to the assessee's interest income. Had the Assessing Officer accepted in principle the assessee's claim of deduction under Section 80IA [4] of the Act and thereafter, after scrutiny not made any disallowance for interest income forming part of such larger claim, the principle of change of opinion would apply. In the present case, once the Assessing Officer rejected the claim of deduction under Section 80IA [4] of the Act in its entirety, there was thereafter no occasion and any need for him to dissect such claim for rejection on some additional ground. The second reason which we referred to in the previous paragraph is of merger. The Assessing Officer having rejected the claim of deduction under Section 80IA [4] of the Act, the issue we may recall was carried in appeal by the assessee. The Commissioner [Appeals] allowed the claim in its entirety. It would thereafter be not open for the Assessing Officer to reopen this very claim for possible disallowance of part thereof. When the Commissioner [Appeals] was examining the assessee's grievance against the order of Assessing Officer disallowing the claim, it was open for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
