2022 (2) TMI 928

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dment to be carried out. Amendment shall be carried out within one week, notwithstanding the disposal of this petition. Mr. Suresh Kumar also had no objection. 2. Petitioner is a company engaged in manufacturing sale and trading of bulk drugs and pharmaceuticals, manufacturing and sale of animal health and nutrition products. Petitioner had filed return of income for A.Y.-2006- 2007 on 30th November 2006 declaring total income of Rs. 13,43,35,210/- under normal provisions and Rs. 82,54,99,551/- under Section 115 JB of the Income Tax Act 1961 (the Act). Petitioner filed revised return of income on 31st March 2008 declaring total income of Rs. 14,52,44,314/- under normal provisions and Rs. 82,54,99,551/- under Section 115JB of the Act. The....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the notice issued under Section 148 has to be quashed and set aside. 5. Mr. Suresh Kumar was confronted with these facts. Mr. Suresh Kumar submitted, relying on paragraph 21 of the affidavit in reply, that respondent no.2 had given the approval to issue notice under Section 148 as per the provisions of section 151 of the Act in accordance with law. Mr. Suresh Kumar submitted that the reasons were recorded on 25th March 2013 and approval dated 26th March 2013 was received in the office of respondent no.1 on 28th March 2013 and, therefore, the approval has been correctly granted. We are unable to accept the submissions of Mr. Suresh Kumar because the documents speak otherwise. There is no evidence whatsoever that the reasons were recorded ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....all the three points in the reasons have already considered during the assessment proceedings and even if the assessment order is silent on one or two points, still as held by this court time and again, the Assessing Officer should be considered to have applied his mind, once a query is raised and answers are provided. 7. Mr. Suresh Kumar in his submissions justified the reopening and went into the merits of the case. In short, he reiterated what is recorded in the reasons. 8. The reasons for reopening raised three issues and it read as under:- "................ 1. During the year assessee made onetime payment to M/s Atul Ltd to get itself released and discharged in respect of all the obligations of the company as le....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....December 2009 addressed by Petitioner to ACIT to which a 7 pages note is annexed to explain why payment of Rs. 10 crores towards lease land at Valsad is to be considered as revenue in nature and allowable under Section 37(1) of the Act. Also annexed to the petition is a letter dated 24th December 2009 addressed by petitioner to ACIT once again explaining the back ground regarding surrender of lease to Atul Ltd and also providing a copy of the lease agreement. In the said letter, petitioner has also referred to almost 7 replies addressed to the notices received from respondent no.1. Therefore, this has been a subject of consideration during the assessment proceedings. 10. As held in Aroni Commercials Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e-tax [1979] 119 ITR 996 has held that even if according to respondent no.1 there was an error discovered on a reconsideration of the same material (and no more) does not give power to the Assessing Officer to re-open the assessment. Paragraph no. 14 of the said judgment read as under : 14. Now, in the case before us, the Income-tax Officer had, when he made the original assessment, considered the provisions of Sections 9 and 10. Any different view taken by him afterwards on application of those provisions would amount to a change of opinion on material already considered by him. The Revenue contends that it is open to him to do so, and on that basis to reopen the assessment under Section 147 (b). Reliance is placed on Kalyanji Mav....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....IT after referring to personal hearing as well as 7 earlier communications and notice issued by respondent no.1 under Section 142(1) of the Act, explained why the amount of Rs. 30,15,135/- reported by the Tax Auditor was part of the amount of Rs. 1,13,73,436/- as provisions for employee retention strategy and was rightly considered as disallowable in computing business income and hence the amount has not been separately disallowed as prior period expenditure. Therefore, once again this has been subject of consideration during the assessment proceedings and as noted earlier, once a query raised during the assessment proceeding and assessee has replied to it, it follows that the query raised was a subject of consideration of the Assessing Off....