TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (6) TMI 56
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ive orders of the ld. CIT(A) -3, Mumbai all dated 15-03-2012. 2. The assessee has raised a common issue in both the appeals i.e. in ground No. 1 which reads as under:- "1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the learned C.I.T. (Appeals) erred in confirming the stand of the learned Assessing Officer ('A.O.') in reopening the assessment under section 147 of the Act. The appellant prays that the reopening of assessment under section 147 of the Act may be declared as bad in law and reassessment order may please be cancelled." 3. Since the issue raised in ground No. 1 in both the appeals of the assessee is a legal issue regarding validity of reopening and goes to the root of the matter, through we take up ground....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of Asian Paints Ltd. vs. DCIT, 308 ITR 195 (Bom) as well as the judgment of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of ICICI Home Finance Co. Ltd. vs. ACIT 210 Taxmann 67. 6. On the other hand, the ld. D.R. has submitted that the A.O. while completing the assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act did not examine the expenses on medicine debited by the assessee. Further the assessee is not maintaining any stock register as per Rule 6 of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. Thus the assessee has not disclosed the correct and entire facts in the return of income and audit party has pointed out the in-correct claim of the assessee in the audit objection. Therefore, the A.O. has rightly reopened the assessment based on the audit objection. In support of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....It can be believed that the doctor has incurred cost of medicine for treatment and is not reimbursed from the patient Further, Jaslok deduction of Rs. 5,40,646/- pertains to usuage of room operation theatre and various facities provided by the hospital. This shows that the assessee takes private treatment for her patients in Jaslok Hospital. " 8. These reasons recorded by the A.O. are nothing but the audit observation/objection by the internal audit party and recorded by the A.O. are verbatim of objections raised by audit party word by word without changing paragraph or the language of the objection raised by the audit party. We further note that after recording the audit objection, the audit party has written that the above facts may be....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Hospital. The A.O. adopted these observations of the audit party as reasons for reopening the assessments in question. Therefore, it is not a case of the A.O. that the audit party pointed out only the factual error and based on the factual error and on examination of record the A.O. formed an independent opinion to believe that the income assessable to tax has escaped assessment. Rather the A.O. has not recorded that he has reasons to believe that income assessable to tax has escaped assessment. 9. In the case of Asian Paints Ltd. (supra) the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court held in para 10 is as under:- "10. It is further to be seen that the Legislature has not conferred power on the Assessing Officer to review its own order. There....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h Court while dealing with the issue of validity of reopening based on the audit objection has observed in para 6, 9 & 10 is as under:- "6. The power to reopen a completed assessment under section 147 of the Act has been bestowed on the Assessing Officer, if he has reason to believe that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for any assessment year. However, this belief that income has escaped assessment has to be the reasonable belief of the Assessing Officer himself and cannot be an opinion and/or belief of some other authority. In fact, the Supreme Court in the matter of India Eastern Newspaper Society v. Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi reported in 119 ITR page 996 has held that whether an assessment has escaped as....