M/S NOBLE DRUGS LTD,NASHIK vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CIRCLE -2 , NASHIK

This assessee’s appeal for A.Y. 2008-09 is directed against the CIT(A)-2, Nashik’s order dated 14/11/2019 passed in case No. Nsk/CIT(A)-2/295/ 2015-16 involving proceeding u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short "the Act”. Case called twice. None appears at assessee’s behest. It is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.

The assessee pleads the following substantive grounds in instant appeal. 1. On the basis of the facts, in the circumstances of the case and as per law, the Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals)- 2, Nashik, is not justified in upholding the issue of notice u/s. 148 after 4 years from the end of the assessment year when there was no failure on the part of appellant to disclose fully & truly all material facts necessary for assessment allowing the issue of notice U/s. 148 of the Act as the proceeding U/s. 148 were initiated merely due to change in opinion of the AO. 2. On the basis of the facts, in the circumstances of the case and as per law, the Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals)- 2, Nashik, is not justified in holding that there is no any change in opinion, particularly when the A.O. has allowed the carry forward of the loss pertaining to A.Y. 2000-01 in the assessment proceedings for the year under appeal. 3. On the basis of facts and in the circumstances of the case and as per law, the Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals)- 2, Nashik, is not justified in upholding the reassessment proceedings when the same were initiated on the basis of Audit Objection. 4. On the basis of the facts and in the circumstances of the case and as per law, the Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals) - 2, Nashik, is not justified in disallowing carry forward of the unabsorbed depreciation pertaining to A.Y. 2000-01 beyond 8 years. The CIT(A) is further not justified in ignoring the decision of Gujrat High Court in the case of General Motors India Pvt. Ltd. vs Dy. CIT (Spl Civil Application No. 1773 of 2012 as well as Supreme Court in the case of Seshsayee Paper & Boards Ltd. Vs Dy. CIT (ITA No.1812-13 of 2005 as well as ITAT, Mumbai Bench in the case of Confidence Petroleum India Ltd. (ITA No.1937/Mum/2012, A.Y. 2007-08)

Mr. Desai could hardly rebut the clinching fact that we are in assessment year 2008-09 wherein the Assessing Officer had initiated the impugned reopening on 05.01.2015 i.e. beyond a period of 4 years from the

That apart, the factual position would hardly any different on merits as well since this tribunal’s Special Bench decision in Times Guarantee case(supra) has already been reversed in General Motors India Pvt. Ltd. V/s DCIT (2012) 25 taxmann.com 364(Guj.) We according quash the impugned re-opening qua the instant latter aspect as well. All other pleadings on merits stand rendered academic.

Delay of six days in filing the instant appeal is condoned since falling in Covid-19 pandemic outbreak period.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed in above terms. Order pronounced in the Open Court on this 28th day of July, 2022.