TMI Blog2021 (12) TMI 880X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt and Petitioner had submitted details of unabsorbed depreciation and business loss. Petitioner had disclosed the figures of unabsorbed business loss and unabsorbed depreciation in ITR Form-6. Petitioner had also filed computation of income under provisions of the said Act. Petitioner had also disclosed in Schedule relating to MAT in the said Form giving details of working of book profit including specific disclosures under the head Loss brought forward or unabsorbed depreciation, whichever is less . From the reasons recorded by Respondent No.1, it appears that there was no tangible material for Respondent No.1 to conclude that income had escaped assessment. For the aforesaid reasons the Assessing Officer has acted in excess of the lim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... being brought forward loss or unabsorbed depreciation, whichever is less. The amounts reduced to arrive at the book profit was duly disclosed in computing book profit. The income was uploaded in the prescribed form ITR-6. In the said form, Petitioner gave the details assessment year-wise of brought forward business loss and unabsorbed depreciation in Schedule BFLA and CFL. Petitioner also disclosed the working of book profit including specific disclosure of ₹ 1,36,85,720/- under the head Loss brought forward or unabsorbed depreciation, whichever is less , in Schedule relating to MAT in the said form. 4. The aforesaid return of income was selected for scrutiny assessment vide notice under Section 143(2) dated 3rd September 2013. Du ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... id Act. On 10th May 2019, Petitioner was served with a letter dated 7th May 2019 giving extracts of the reasons recorded for reopening of the concluded assessment. Petitioner, vide its letter dated 23th July 2019, objected to the reopening of the concluded assessment. Petitioner s objections were rejected by an order dated 18th September 2019. 7. Petitioner has therefore filed present petition challenging notice dated 27th March 2019 issued under Section 148 of the said Act and order dated 18th September 2019 rejecting objections. 8. Respondent No.1 has filed reply stating that there is failure on the part of Petitioner to disclose truly and fairly all material facts. It is stated that in the original assessment, the Assessing Officer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l material facts that were necessary for computation of income but was a case wherein assessment was sought to be reopened on account of change of opinion of Assessing Officer, the reopening was not justified. It is also held that where primary facts necessary for assessment are fully and truly disclosed, the Assessing Officer is not entitled to reopen the assessment on a change of opinion. It is held that while considering the material on a record, one view is conclusively taken by Assessing Officer, it would not be open for the Assessing Officer to reopen the assessment based on the very same material and take another view. 11. Perusal of the reasons record by respondent No.1 indicates that the notice of reassessment proceeds on the ba ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
