2017 (12) TMI 68

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sain, Sr. Standing Counsel. For the Respondent(s): None. S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J. (OPEN COURT) 1. The Revenue claims to be aggrieved by the order of the Income Tax Tribunal (ITAT) which has set aside the assessment framed. It contends that the reasoning with respect to untenability of re-assessment for the Assessment Year (AY) 2000-01, in the facts of this case, was not justified. 2. The a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....03 determining the income at Rs. 1,04,56,040/-. On perusal of the records it is noticed that the assessee has claimed deduction u/s 80HHD amounting to Rs. 2191238/- which was allowed at the time of assessment completed u/s 143(3). It is seen that in the profit of the business commutated for the purpose of deduction u/s 80HHD, the interest income of Rs. 6,54,23,22/- and license fee of Rs. 5,69,49,7....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... year 2000-01."   3. The additions made by the Assessing Officer were appealed against by the assessee. The CIT(A) confirmed the additions holding that the amounts brought to tax could not have been legitimately claimed as deduction under Section 80HHb. Upon further appeal, the ITAT allowed the assessee's contentions. The ITAT has reasoned that the AO's opinion, with respect to assessee's ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... The material on record was only examined and used for recording reasons for reopening. The reopening was merely a change of opinion on the same set of facts and material. No fresh material came in to the possession of the Assessing Officer warranting reopening. Hence the reopening is bad in law. We, therefore, set aside and quash the notice u/s 148 and assessment order for A.Y. 2000-01. We, th....