TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (9) TMI 1893
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....venue filed an affidavit stating reasons for the said delay. Upon hearing both the parties and on examination of the affidavit, we find that the reasons stated by the Revenue are bonafide, which really prevented in filing the appeal in time and accordingly, we condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 5. The Appellant Revenue raised 7 grounds of appeal amongst which the only issue emanates for our consideration as to whether the ld. CIT(A) is justified in holding that the reopening of assessment as invalid in the facts and circumstances of the case. 6. Brief facts emanating from the record are that the assessee filed his original return of income on 30.11.2016 declaring total income of Rs..867,56,06,190/-. Thereafter, the assessee filed its revised return of income on 31.03.2017 on the same amount, which was declared in the original return of income. The assessment was completed determining the income of the assessee at Rs..932,90,04,046/- under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ["Act" in short]. The said assessment was reopened by issuing notice under section 148 of the Act, the reasons of which, reproduced at page 1 to 5 of the assessment order. 7....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... On perusal of the order of the Tribunal in assessee's own case for the assessment year 2008-09, we find that the appellant-Revenue reopened the assessment for AY 2008-09 on the same reasons, which are similar in the present reassessment order. In that case, the Tribunal held that the order of the ld. CIT(A) is correct in holding that the case of the assessee which fall under "change of opinion". The relevant part at para 8 and 9 are reproduced herein below for better understanding: 8. We have heard the rival contentions, and perused the materials available on record. The A.O has allowed the claim u/s. 36(1)(viia)(c) of the Act after due verification. The assessee in response to notice u/s. 142(1) of the Act has submitted before the A.O the details of provisions and contingency of Rs. 57,43,00,000/- mentioned in the detailed notes and claim of interest on debenture u/s. 36(1)(viii) of the Act. The Tribunal in the assessee's own case has held that the provisions against standard assets are allowable u/s. 36(1)(viia)(c) of the Act and interest on debenture allowable u/s. 36(1)(viii) of the Act. Therefore, the A.O has disallowed the claim after due verification. The Hon'ble A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....elevant portion of Circular No. 549 dated October 31, 1989 ([1990] 182 ITR (St.) 1, 29), which reads as follows: "7.2 Amendment made by the Amending Act, 1989, to reintroduce the expression `reason to believe' in section 147.-A number of representations were received against the omission of the words `reason to believe' from section 147 and their substitution by the `opinion' of the Assessing Officer. It was pointed out that the meaning of the expression, `reason to believe' had been explained in a number of court rulings in the past and was well settled and its omission from section 147 would give arbitrary powers to the Assessing Officer to reopen past assessments on mere change of opinion. To allay these fears, the Amending Act, 1989, has again amended section 147 to reintroduce the expression `has reason to believe' in place of the words `for reasons to be recorded by him in writing, is of the opinion'. Other provisions of the new section 147, however, remain the same." 9. We, therefore concur with the findings of the Ld. CIT(A) that this is a case of change in opinion, which is permissible as per law. In view of the above, the appeal f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nds at the time of making investment in tax-free securities are greater than its investments in tax-free Income yielding investments, no disallowance of interest cost under Section 14A of the Act needs to be made. Since, the facts in the current year are similar to that of earlier years, respectfully following the decision of the jurisdictional Tribunal, it is held that no disallowance under Section 14A of the Act with respect to interest cost is called for on such investments subject to verification of the details (regarding own funds and investment in exempt income yielding funds) furnished by the appellant during the appellate proceedings. 4.1.5 Now coming to the second issue regarding computation of administrative expenditure in accordance with Rule 8D(2)(iii), the appellant has claimed that it has suo-moto disallowed expenses of Rs. 15.23 crores in the return of income for the AY 2016-17. Here it is worthwhile to note that the Hon'ble ITAT in appellant's own case for earlier years (supra) has directed that the disallowance be restricted to 3% of the exempt dividend income. As far as the appellant's request for deduction of disallowance already made by it a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....me declared by the appellant and the VCF has paid tax on such income in the capacity of representative assessee of the appellant. The ground of appeal is allowed subject to the factual verification by the AO. 21. On perusal of the above, we find no infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT(A) in directing the Assessing Officer for verification that if income has been offered for tax by the beneficiary and any taxes were paid by VCFs in the capacity of representative of assessee on behalf of the beneficiary. If that is the case, the TDS credit for the same should go to the beneficiary. Thus, ground No. 5 raised by the Revenue fails and it is dismissed. 22. Ground No. 6 raised by the Revenue in challenging the action of the ld. CIT(A) in allowing the claim on account of ESOP expenses. 23. We note that the assessee did not claim ESOP expenses in the original return of income as well as revised return of income. The said claim was made before the Assessing Officer, which was rejected in terms of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetze (India) Ltd. Considering the same, the ld. CIT(A) directed the Assessing Officer for verification whether the said expenses ....