Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        Note

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Revenue's Appeal Dismissed, Reopening of Assessment Quashed under Income Tax Act</h1> <h3>ACIT Versus Hycron India </h3> ACIT Versus Hycron India - TMI Issues Involved:1. Justification of reopening of assessment under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act.2. Computation of deduction under Section 80HHC and Section 80-IA of the Income Tax Act.3. Treatment of indirect costs and 90% of interest income in the computation of business profits for deduction purposes.Detailed Analysis:1. Justification of Reopening of Assessment under Section 148:The Revenue appealed against the order of the CIT(A), which quashed the reopening of assessment under Section 148. The assessee had filed a return on 2nd Dec. 2003, processed under Section 143(1)(a), and completed scrutiny assessment under Section 143(3) on 27th Dec. 2005. The AO issued a notice under Section 148 on 9th Feb. 2007, stating that the assessee had not reduced the deduction under Section 80-IA from the profit of the business for computing the deduction under Section 80HHC.The CIT(A) found that the AO had already dealt with the issues of deduction under Sections 80HHC and 80-IA, and indirect costs during the original assessment. The CIT(A) concluded that there were no new facts or materials available to the AO to justify reopening the assessment, and it was merely a change of opinion, which is not permissible under law. The AO's action was based on audit objections, lacking concrete new material, thus making the reopening unjustified and illegal.2. Computation of Deduction under Section 80HHC and Section 80-IA:The AO's reasons for reopening included the computation of deductions under Sections 80HHC and 80-IA. The AO contended that the assessee claimed excess deduction under Section 80HHC by not reducing the deduction allowed under Section 80-IA.The CIT(A) observed that the AO had already considered these deductions during the original assessment. The reassessment involved the same issues without any new material facts, indicating a mere change of opinion. The CIT(A) held that the AO's action was based on a different interpretation of the same facts, which had already been scrutinized and accepted in the original assessment.3. Treatment of Indirect Costs and 90% of Interest Income:The AO argued that the assessee incorrectly computed indirect costs and did not reduce 90% of interest income while calculating business profits for deduction under Section 80HHC. The CIT(A) noted that these aspects were also considered during the original assessment, and no new material facts were presented to justify reopening.The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, emphasizing that the AO's reasons for reopening were based on previously considered facts. The Tribunal referenced several judicial precedents, including the Supreme Court's decision in CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd., which held that reassessment based on a change of opinion is not permissible.Conclusion:The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, affirming the CIT(A)'s decision to quash the reopening of assessment under Section 148. The Tribunal concluded that the AO had no new material facts to justify reopening and that the action was based on a mere change of opinion, which is not allowed under the law. The issues of deduction under Sections 80HHC and 80-IA, and the treatment of indirect costs and interest income, were not decided separately as the reopening itself was quashed.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found