TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (8) TMI 491
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....37(1), as claimed by the assessee, whereas, the assessee has raised the issue of correctness of the reopening of assessment proceedings u/s 148, on the basis of objections raised by the department in assessment year 2005-06, in the cross objections. 3. The disallowance of advertisement expenses in part, has been an issue between the assessee and the department since assessment year 2005-06. As an important fact, the issue of part disallowance has been laid at rest in the assessee's own cases before the co-ordinate Benches in Mumbai in ITA No. 655/Mum/2010 for assessment year 2005-06, being a Third Member decision, which was decided in favour of the assessee. Consequently, in ITA No. 3545/Mum/2010, once again the issue was raised and it wa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssue was taken up as the main ground by the department as the CIT(A) had struck down the reopening u/s 148. In that year, on the same facts the AO had reopened the assessment and went on to make an addition on the basis on assessment year 2005-06 (as it has been done in the instant case). The co-ordinate Bench held that the reassessment proceeding was invalid. The relevant portion of the order is extracted here below : 2.3 Before the ld. CIT(A) it was submitted that the A.O erred in initiating the reassessment proceedings on the basis of finding in the assessment order passed u/s.143(3) for A.Y. 05-06. It was submitted that no new material had come into the possession of the A.O evidencing escapement of income for the impugned assessment y....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bility of expenses. Reopening is, therefore, considered not valid and bad in law on the facts of the case and in view of various Hon'ble Court pronouncements on the matter of change of opinion not being permissible u/s.147." Aggrieved with such order of the ld. CIT(A), the Revenue is in appeal before us. 3. The ld. D.R. referring to the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Multiscreen Media (P) Ltd. vs. UOI and Another reported in 324 ITR 54 submitted that when additional material has been discovered in the assessment proceedings of a subsequent year then the re-assessment proceedings on the basis of such subsequent assessment is valid. Referring to the copy of the reasons recorded, the ld. D.R. submitted that during t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....national Channels as well as NGC Net Work Asia LLC where by the assessee was appointed as an exclusive independent representative in the territory to solicit television advertising for the channels and to collect and remit advertisement charges. Referring to the copy of the reason placed on the paper book, he submitted that the A.O. had simply cut and pasted the facts of A.Y. 2005-06 which are not applicable to the facts of the impugned assessment year i.e. 2004-05. In the case of the assessee there was no advertisement income for the impugned assessment year. There is no live link between the reasons recorded and reason to believe. Referring to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme court in the case of CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd. reporte....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... on the ground that the advertisement expenses were disallowed during A.Y. 2005-06. Since during this assessment year the assessee had debited a sum of Rs. 5,28,19,341/- under the head 'advertisement and publicity expenses' and since the details of such expenses were neither called nor verified by the A.O. and since the assessee has also not made any declaration or not disclosed the information to this effect, therefore, the A.O. had reason to believe that the taxable income of the assessee has escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the Act. It is the submission of the ld. counsel for the assessee that the assessee company entered into Advertising Sales Representation Agreements with Fox International Channels as well as NG....