Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

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 / NCLT & Others
  • 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
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
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
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 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
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    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
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      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

        whatsappJoin Channel
        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        2012 (7) TMI 619 - AT - Income Tax

        📋
        Contents
        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

        Tribunal invalidates assessment reopening, deems change of opinion. Assessee's appeal allowed, Revenue's dismissed. The tribunal held that the reopening of the assessment was invalid as there was no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose necessary details, and ...
                      Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                          Tribunal invalidates assessment reopening, deems change of opinion. Assessee's appeal allowed, Revenue's dismissed.

                          The tribunal held that the reopening of the assessment was invalid as there was no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose necessary details, and it was considered a mere change of opinion by the Assessing Officer. The appeal filed by the assessee was allowed, and the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. The tribunal also corrected the restriction of the claim under Section 10B by including foreign exchange realization in the total turnover.




                          Issues Involved:
                          1. Reopening of assessment under Section 147.
                          2. Excess claim of deduction under Section 10B.
                          3. Excess claim of depreciation in the computation of statement.
                          4. Change of written down value (WDV) from the assessment year 2001-02 onwards.
                          5. Depreciation on motor cars at 50% instead of 20%.

                          Detailed Analysis:
                          1. Reopening of Assessment under Section 147:
                          The assessee contested the reopening of the assessment under Section 147, arguing that the Assessing Officer (AO) did not record any satisfaction that there was a failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment. The reopening was initiated after four years from the end of the assessment year, and the original assessment was completed under Section 143(3) after due examination. The tribunal held that the reopening was bad in law as there was no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose necessary details, and it was considered a mere change of opinion by the AO. This was supported by the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd 187 Taxman 312(SC)/320 ITR 561.

                          2. Excess Claim of Deduction under Section 10B:
                          The AO restricted the exemption under Section 10B, which was contested by the assessee. The CIT (A) allowed the benefit to the assessee, relying on the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in CIT vs. Yokogawa India Ltd, 341 ITR 385, which stated that the deduction on export profit under Section 10B is to be allowed from the total income of the assessee. The tribunal upheld the CIT (A)'s decision, agreeing that the unabsorbed depreciation and losses cannot be set off against the income of the undertaking claimed under Section 10B.

                          3. Excess Claim of Depreciation in the Computation of Statement:
                          The AO made an adjustment of Rs. 88,39,256/- for excess claim of depreciation, which was not upheld by the CIT (A), and relief was given to the assessee. The tribunal noted that the AO did not act upon the claim of excess depreciation on the basis of WDV of earlier years and upheld the CIT (A)'s decision.

                          4. Change of Written Down Value (WDV) from the Assessment Year 2001-02 Onwards:
                          The AO noticed a change in the opening WDV for subsequent years, which could affect the depreciation allowable under the Income Tax Act. However, the AO did not make any adjustment regarding this issue. The tribunal found no merit in the AO's observation that the assessee claimed excess deduction and upheld the CIT (A)'s decision.

                          5. Depreciation on Motor Cars at 50% Instead of 20%:
                          The AO restricted the depreciation on motor cars to 20%, which was contested by the assessee. The tribunal referred to the ITAT decision in Daleep S. Chandnani v. ACIT, 14 SOT 233, and LM Glasfiber (India) Pvt. Ltd vs. ACIT, which supported the claim of depreciation at 50%. The tribunal concluded that the vehicles were registered as commercial vehicles and fell within the entry for claiming depreciation at 50%, and thus there was no need for reopening the assessment on this issue.

                          Conclusion:
                          The tribunal held that the reopening of the assessment was bad in law and allowed the appeal filed by the assessee. The Revenue's appeal was dismissed. The tribunal also corrected the CIT (A)'s restriction of the claim under Section 10B by including the foreign exchange realization in the total turnover, which became an academic issue as the reopening was found to be invalid. The order was pronounced in the open court on 8.6.2012.
                          Full Summary is available for active users!
                          Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                          Topics

                          ActsIncome Tax
                          No Records Found