2017 (9) TMI 1860

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....antial question of law:- 3.1 Appeal No.211/2017 1. Whether the Tribunal was legally and factually correct in upholding the decision of CIT(A) in quashing the reassessment proceedings which were initiated adhering to the provisions of section 147? 2. Whether the Tribunal was legally and factually correct in upholding the decision of CIT(A) in deleting the disallowance of additional depreciation made by the Assessing Officer amounting to Rs. 18,16,98,068/- specifically when the assessee is entitled for additional depreciation u/s. 32(1)(iia) w.e.f. Assessment Year 2013-14? 3.2 Appeal no.213/2017 1. Whether the Tribunal was legally and factually correct in upholding the decision of CIT(A) in quashing the reasse....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....3) of the Act. The ld. CIT(A) held reopening of the assessment by the AO as merely change of opinion which is bad in law and the order passed u/s 147 read with section 143(3) was held to be void ab-initio. During the course of hearing, the ld. AR has also submitted that both the issues regarding the claim of additional depreciation on power plant and windmill, and the claim of deduction u/s 43B were examined in the course of original assessment proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Act. It was further submitted that when the AO in the original assessment proceeding has examined both the issues, the issuance of notice u/s 148 on those very issues is only on account of change of opinion and on such change of opinion, reassessment proceedings initiate....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ufacturing of cement whereas the electricity produced from windmill at Jaisalmer was supplied to Jaipur Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. who in turn reduce that quantity of electricity from the power bill raised on the assessee. On these P&M, assessee claimed additional depreciation of Rs. 18,16,98,068/- (Rs. 14,44,58,058+ Rs. 3,72,40,000) u/s 32(1)(iia) of the Act. Firstly, in the reason recorded before issue of notice u/s 148, the AO has stated as under: "In this case, assessment u/s 43(3) of the IT Act was passed on 31.12.2010 at Rs. 84,65,41,700/- as against returned income of Rs. 76,09,97,363/-Later on it is revealed that the assessee claimed and was allowed deduction of depreciation Rs. 70.53 crore, which include R....