TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 1639X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... taking. This view of the AO is not matching with the decision of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case in earlier assessment years as mentioned hereinabove. Once the issue has been thoroughtly examined/scrutinized and has met the higher judicial forum, reopening of the assessment based on the same set of facts is nothing but a change of opinion which is not permissible as per the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kelvinator of India [2010 (1) TMI 11 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA]. - Decided against revenue - I.T.A. No. 4266/Mum/2013 - - - Dated:- 10-9-2015 - SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND RAM LAL NEGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER For the Appellant : Shri Ajay Modi For the Respondent : Shri Prakash K. Jotwan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Act was issued in response to which the assessee asked the AO to treat the return of income filed on 31.10.2007 as having been filed pursuant to the notice u/s. 148 of the Act. 3.2. The assessee vide letter dated 16.10.2012 vehemently challenged the reopening of the assessment stating that the impugned facts were exhaustively verified during the course of the original assessment proceedings therefore reopening the completed assessment on the same set of facts is nothing but a change of opinion. The AO did not accept the submissions made by the assessee. The AO was of the firm belief that the receipt of ₹ 58,08,273/- being transferred to sales tax benefit in respect of windmill undertaking is not an income derived from the busine ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dia 320 ITR 561 and the decision of the Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs ICICI Bank Ltd. 349 ITR 482, the Ld. CIT(A) held that the AO has not received any information from any source and the reopening is completely based on the change of opinion and accordingly held the action of the AO for issuing notice u/s. 148 as bad in law and in violation of the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court. 5. Aggrieved by this, the Revenue is before us. 6. The Ld. Departmental Representative strongly supported the findings of the AO. 7. Per contra, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee reiterated what has been stated before the lower authorities. Referring to the grounds of appeal, the Ld. Counsel pointed out that the amount of sales tax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
