C.I.T., UDAIPUR vs. M/S HINDUSTAN ZINC LTD.

ITA/218/2014HC RajasthanRJHC01030234201420 May 20161 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The Tribunal (ITAT) held that the reassessment proceedings initiated by the Assessing Officer for assessment year 2006-07 were vitiated by a 'change of opinion'. Consequently, the Tribunal struck down these reassessment proceedings. As a result of the reassessment proceedings being quashed, the appeal filed by the Revenue against an earlier order was rendered infructuous and was dismissed. The High Court, in its order, noted that a similar appeal for assessment year 2005-06 involving an identical question had been dismissed by the court on the same day. Therefore, for parity of reasons, the High Court dismissed the present appeal. The operative direction was the dismissal of the Revenue's appeal.

What were the facts?

This appeal by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Udaipur (Revenue) challenges an order dated 29.4.14 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Jodhpur Bench. The ITAT had allowed a Cross Objection filed by the assessee, M/s. Hindustan Zinc Ltd. The Tribunal struck down reassessment proceedings initiated by the Assessing Officer for assessment year 2006-07 on the grounds of 'change of opinion'. Consequently, the appeal preferred by the Revenue against an earlier order dated 28.3.13 was dismissed as infructuous. The High Court notes that a similar appeal (No.166/14) for assessment year 2005-06, involving an identical question, was dismissed by the court on the same day.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the reassessment proceedings initiated by the Assessing Officer for assessment year 2006-07 were valid, or if they were vitiated by a 'change of opinion' (question of law and fact, concerning the validity of reassessment proceedings). The Revenue's contention, as understood from the context of the appeal being dismissed as infructuous after the ITAT struck down reassessment proceedings, is that the reassessment proceedings were validly initiated. The Revenue likely argued that there was a valid basis for reassessment and not merely a change of opinion. The judgment does not explicitly record the Revenue's arguments on this point, but it is implied that they would have supported the reassessment. The Assessee's contention, as accepted by the ITAT and leading to the dismissal of the Revenue's appeal, was that the reassessment proceedings were based on a 'change of opinion' by the Assessing Officer, rendering them invalid. The assessee's Cross Objection was allowed on this basis.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

None explicitly mentioned

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

1 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, UDAIPUR VS. M/S. HINDUSTAN ZINC LTD. (D.B.INCOME TAX APPEAL 218/14) Dated:- 20.5.16. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SANGEET LODHA HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KAILASH CHANDRA SHARMA Mr.K.K.Bissa, for the appellant. 1. This appeal is directed against order dated 29.4.14 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Jodhpur Bench, Jodhpur, whereby the Cross Objection filed by the assessee in the appeal preferred by the Revenue against the order dated 28.3.13, has been allowed and while striking down the re-assessment proceedings initiated by the Assessing Officer (AO) for the assessment year 2006- 07, on the change of opinion, the appeal preferred by the Revenue has been dismissed as having become infructuous. 2. The appeal preferred by the Revenue being No.166/14 relating to the assessment year 2005-06 involving identical question has been dismissed by this court today and therefore, for the parity of reasons, this appeal also deserves to be dismissed. 3. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed in light of order passed by this court today in D.B.Income Tax Appeal No.166/14. (KAILASH CHANDRA SHARMA),J. (SANGEET LODHA),J. Aditya/

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →