2012 (1) TMI 348

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....evenue and the cross objection by the assessee are disposed of by this common order. 2. Since the assessee has challenged the reopening of the assessment in the cross objection which goes to the root of the matter, let us take the cross objection first. 3. Shri A.S. Narayananmurthy, the ld.counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessment was completed u/s 143(3) on 30-03-2006. The assessing officer reopened the assessment to exclude 90% of the gross processing charges from the export profit by issuing a notice u/s 148 on 17-03-2008. According to the ld.rperesentative, once the assessment was completed u/s 143(3), the assessment can be reopened after expiry of four years from the end of the year only in case there was a failure o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lanation 1 to section 147, the ld.representative submitted that mere production of accounts or other evidence from which the assessing officer could have discovered the necessary information would not necessarily amount to disclosure within the meaning of section 147 of the Act. In view of Explanation 1 to section 147 according to the ld. DR, the assessing officer has rightly reopened the assessment. 5. We have considered the rival submissions on either side and also perused the material available on record. It is not in dispute that the assessee has deducted 90% of the net processing charges from the business profit. In view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Commissioner of Income-tax vs K Ravindran Nair (supra), the assessee ha....