https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=220071 The HC held that the reopening of assessment under Section 147 was invalid as no new material surfaced after processing the return under Section 143(1). The sale proceeds of quota were correctly treated as business income under Section 28(iv) and eligible for deduction under Section 80HHC, consistent with prior Tribunal and departmental rulings. The AO's reasons merely reflected a change of opinion, which is impermissible for reassessment. The court emphasized that "reason to believe" must be based on tangible material indicating escapement of income, not subjective or pretended grounds. The AO's action was deemed an abuse of power, aligning with SC precedent in CIT v. Kelvinator, and the reopening notice was quashed. en-us Wed, 12 Dec 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 05 Aug 2025 12:54:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=220071 The HC held that the reopening of assessment under Section 147 was invalid as no new material surfaced after processing the return under Section 143(1). The sale proceeds of quota were correctly treated as business income under Section 28(iv) and eligible for deduction under Section 80HHC, consistent with prior Tribunal and departmental rulings. The AO's reasons merely reflected a change of opinion, which is impermissible for reassessment. The court emphasized that "reason to believe" must be based on tangible material indicating escapement of income, not subjective or pretended grounds. The AO's action was deemed an abuse of power, aligning with SC precedent in CIT v. Kelvinator, and the reopening notice was quashed. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 12 Dec 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=220071