TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (11) TMI 1777
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....S, CIT ORDER PER Dr. O.K. NARAYANAN, VICE PRESIDENT This appeal filed by the assessee relates to the assessment year 2004-05. The appeal is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals)-IX at Chennai dated 28.3.2013. The appeal arises out of the assessment completed under sec.143(3), read with sec.147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 2. The grounds raised by the assessee in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rder that these issues came to light on subsequent verification is incorrect. It is pure change of opinion amounting to review of his earlier conclusions. Re opening provisions initiated is bad in law, as details about DEPB/DFRC sales were part of original asst records. The Assessing Officer scrutiny asst u/s 143 dt 18/12/2006, has made the order in the light of law prevailing that year-notwithsta....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of proceeds generated in the hands of the assessee on sale of DEPB/DFRC, entitled to it as an exporter. 4. Here, the impugned assessment year is 2004-05. The law relating to taxability of the above stated proceeds has been brought into statute book through the Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 2005. It is in the light of this amended law that the assessing authority has reopened the impugned assessm....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the purpose of assessment. In the present case, the reopening has been made after expiry of 4 years from the end of the relevant previous year. Therefore, on this ground itself, the impugned assessment is not sustainable in law. 5. Secondly, the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Avani Exports & Others vs. CIT (348 ITR 391) has held that retrospective amendment is not valid in law. 6. Th....