TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (3) TMI 315
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nue, urges only the following question of law for our consideration:- Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in quashing the reopening of the assessment particularly when the assessment was reopened within a period of four years from the end of the assessment year? 3. Mr. Mody, the learned counsel appearing for the Respondent at the very outset point that the issue raised herein namely can a reopening be issued notice by the Assessing Officer on the very ground which he had opposed in response to the query from the Audit is no longer res integra. It is submitted that this issue stands concluded in favour of the Respondent - Assessee by the decisions of this Court in IL & FS Invest....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....jection was not justified. In support he relies upon the decision of the Apex Court in A.L.M. Firm V. CIT (1991) 189 ITR 285. c) The impugned order of the Tribunal is perverse in as much as without any basis it has come to the conclusion that the Assessing Officer had issued the notice on the basis of audit objection; and d) The decision of the Apex Court in Liberty India v. CIT (2009) 317 ITR 218 (SC) decides the issue in favour of the Revenue with regards to the merits of the issue viz. not entitled to duty drawback incentive deduction under Section 80IB (4) of the Act. 5. The first grievance of the Revenue that in view of the decision of this Court in Hindustan Lever (Supra), it is not open to go behind the reasons recorded by the Ass....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng himself concluded that no income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment, on the very ground has now issued the reopening notice. Thus there is no merit in this objection of the Revenue. 6. The second grievance of the Revenue is that there is a time gap between the Assessing Officer's response to the audit objection contesting that any income chargeable to tax has escaped audit and his issuing the reopening notice. This according to the Revenue would indicate that the Assessing Officer has possibly applied his mind, in the interregnum once again to the facts and has now come to the conclusion independently of the audit objection, that the income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. There is no evidence of the same on record. I....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s that the Assessing Officer did not apply his mind is without any basis. This we do not accept. The impugned order records the fact that it had examined the Assessing Officer's letter to the audit objection in respect of grant of deduction under Section 80IB (4) of the Act. The response of the Assessing Officer's as contained in letter dated 29 October 2007 was before the Tribunal as a part of the paper book and in that letter, it has been mentioned at length on the basis of case law as existing in the relevant time that in his understanding of law the Respondent was entitled to the deduction under Section 80 IB (4) of the Act in respect of duty drawback incentive. Further the impugned order of the Tribunal also reproduced the audi....