9911796707
TMI Blog1981 (12) TMI 46X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d nil of the ITO, Company. Cir. VI (2), Bombay, passed in the asst. yrs. 1972-73. 2. The relevant facts, in brief, are that the assessee is a company. The previous year relevant for the asst. yrs. 1972-73 is the calendar year (31st December 1971). The original assessment for the asst. yrs. 1972-73 was completed on 30th December 1972. Subsequently, a notice u/s 148 of the IT Act, 1961, (hereinaft ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the other two grounds and the ITO had reopened the assessment only to make the two disallowance which were found wrong as per his order; that the assessee had not given any other reasons or ground of appeal for challenging the reopening of the assessment. So, he concluded that there were only tow points adverse to the assessee which prompted the ITO to reopen the assessment and as both these ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s issued the notice u/s 148 of the Act but his order does not show that whether he made the reopening u/s 147(b) or 147 (a) of the Act. At the time of argument, the ld. Deptl. Rep. also failed to show from the record that under which sub-section of s. 147 of the Act, the assessment is reopened. However, Shri Vohra, ld. Deptl. Rep., on our asking, stated that the reopening of the assessment is made ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Act. The reopening of the assessment is manifestly on the basis of the change of opinion, which is not the basis for taking action u/s 147(b) of the Act. The reopening of the assessment is manifestly on the basis of the change of opinion, which is not the basis for taking action u/s 147(b) of the Act. Therefore, in this situation of the matter, we hold that the reopening is not valid. This view ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
