9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (1) TMI 923X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aised by the Petitioner. 3. The Petitioner is a Private Limited Company and is in the business of hiring rigs and drilling rigs. The Petitioner filed return of income on 30 March 2017 for the Assessment Year 2015-16. The Petitioner received the notice under Section 143(2) of the Act on 20 September 2017. Pursuant to the said notice the Petitioner submitted documents. A notice under Section 142(1) of the Act dated 9 November 2017 was received by the Petitioner. The Petitioner submitted details pursuant to the said notice. Another notice under Section 142(1) of the Act dated 30 November 2017 was received by the Petitioner to which the Petitioner submitted documents including various details. One more notice under Section 142(1) of the Act d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d from the actual cost of the asset as defined in clause (1) of section 43. It is seen from Annual Accounts and submission made during assessment that company has no revenue firm operation and assets (Rings and connected machineries have been sold in previous year to M/s Hohn Engergy Ltd. From Depreciation chart, it is seen that opening w.d.v. of block "Plant & Machinery" is zero and addition of Rs. 238620685 is said to be on account of foreign exchange loss, depreciation @ 15% is claimed and allowed by the department in computation as per Income Tax Act. This is incorrect as i) as per assessee's submission company's operation are standstill i.e. assets are not in use for business activities and ii) the rigs and related properties were ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the explanation of the Petitioner the Assessing Officer has passed the assessment order. The learned counsel relying upon the decision of this Court in the case of Integra Garments & Textiles Ltd. vs. Income Tax Officer & Ors. WP No.3443 of 2018 decided on 25 January 2019., Zauri Foods and Farms Pvt. Ltd. vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and Anr. WP No.1001 of 2017 decided on 11 April 2018. and order passed in the case of State Bank of India v/s Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-2(2)(1), Mumbai and Ors.WP No. 271 of 2018 decided on 15 June 2018., contended that in the facts of this case Assessing Officer has applied his mind and passed the assessment order, thus, the reopening of assessment would be without jurisdiction. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the so called other two grounds for reopening. The Assessing Officer has not stated that the two grounds for reopening have gone unanswered. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the Respondent that it is not necessary. But at the prima facie stage, we note the way parties have understood and acted on the Reason, which would be otherwise in normal course of conduct. 9. We now turn to the contention of change of opinion by the Assessing Officer on this aspect. As regards application of Section 43A and the second explanation thereto, a query was raised by the Assessing Officer vide notice under Section 142(1) wherein the Assessing Officer stated that on perusal of depreciation charge was seen during the year and the information was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
