9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 601X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion 143(3) read with section 144C of the Act on April 30, 2014, with an addition of Rs. 31.13 crores. 2. The impugned reassessment notice in this case was issued on March 30, 2017 ; subsequently, the Assessing Officer (AO) furnished the "reasons recorded for issuance of notice" to the assessee. Those reasons, inter alia, states as follows : "2. Subsequently, audit was conducted in the case of M/s. FIS Global Business Solutions India Pvt. Ltd. and the audit party pointed out that the assessee during the assessment year 2010-11 has claimed deduction of Rs. 3,11,80,117 on account of forex gain on certegy (interest income) and the same was allowed to the assessee by the Assessing Officer. Forex gain on interest income, being revenue in natu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... per Society v. CIT [1979] 119 ITR 996 (SC) ; 3. CIT v. First Leasing Co. of India Ltd. [2000] 241 ITR 248 (Mad). Hence, I have reason to believe that the assessee-company has wrongly claimed and was allowed deduction of Rs. 3,11,80,117 on account of forexgain on certegy which is not an allowable expense which has escaped assessment. 7. In view of the above noted fact, I have reasons to believe that the income of Rs. 3,11,80,117 which was chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for the assessment year 2010-11 on account of failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for the assessment of the assessment year 2010-11 and this is a fit case to issue notice under section 148 for the assessm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ask for reassessment and which has, therefore, been done in the present case. It is, however, admitted by her that a mere change of opinion does not permit action under section 147/148 of the Act. We find that the arguments on behalf of the petitioner are well founded and it must succeed. The audit report merely gives an opinion with regard to the non-availability of the deduction both under section 80-IA and under section 80HHC and that the deduction under section 80-IA was not deducted from the profits of the business while computing deduction under section 80HHC. Clearly, therefore, there was no new or fresh material before the Assessing Officer except the opinion of the Revenue audit party. Since it is settled law that mere chang ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
