COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DEL vs. MITTAL CASTINGS LTD.

H.C.D.-I(r) Contlnuedon Shcet Orders a-5-2002 Present.: Mr. Sanjiv Khanna for the petitioner t rh--Ne*25124.9!. ' * This aPPeaI has been directed at the instan-ce of Revenue under Section 260 A of the Income Tax Act. lg6L. The question which has been raised by the appellant is as to whether a disputed eleclricity 6iff which is penaing before this,Court in a writ petition ulould be'statutory liability or a contractual liability. The assessing officer held that Lhe claim of Lhe assessee would amount to revenue expend,iLure. Notice of the assessment n however, had been issubd by the successor assessing officer purported Lo be on the ground . that a contractual liability cannot be said to be revenue expenditure. , A finding of fact however has been arrived at by the learned Tribunal that the views taken by the assessing officer is inerely a change of opinion from that of the assessing otficer making the original assessm&nt. The question whether a mere' change of opinion can be a ground for initiating .proceedings under section L47 of Lhe Income Tax Act feII for co.nsideration before t,he FuII Bench of this court in l1/? Kelvinator of India Ltd, Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-II being ITC No. Digitally Signed By:AMULYA Signature Not Verified

H.C.D.-I(I) Cortlnuetlon Shcct Sr. No. Orders 4/2OOO. The FuII Bench by -its judgement dated L9.4.2oO2 has held that mere change of opinion would not be a ground for initiaLing a proceeding for r€-assessment. rn view of the afore-mentioned finding of fact arrived at by the rearned Tribunarn Ne are of the opinion thaL no substantial question of law arises for consideration in t.his appeal \This ITR is accordingly dismissed. ,l L ")"l^--t------ ftnrcr JUSTTcE. May 8, 2OA2 SA II I 1 I STKRI, J.