M/S. VADERA ENTERPRISES,GONDIA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, CIRCLE-5, NAGPUR

Mr. Marathe vehemently argued that both the learned lower authorities have rightly initiated sec.147/148 proceedings thereby making the impugned addition of Rs.2,22,664/- representing disallowance of excess salary paid to partners vis-à-vis the income derived in the relevant previous year. It is made clear that the assessment year herein is A.Y.2011-2012 and that the 2 ITA.No.68/NAG./2023 assessee inter alia had filed it’s return on 16.03.2012 followed by a regular assessment u/sec.143(3) of the Act on 24.12.2013. The Assessing Officer thereafter initiated the impugned sec.148/147 proceedings by recording his reasons that the assessee’s taxable income had ‘escaped assessment’ and issued his notice dated 24.11.2015 .

This tribunal asked the Learned DR during the course of hearing to indicate the tangible material leading the Assessing Officer to form his foregoing reason(s) of assessee’s taxable income having escaped assessment. And that too in case of sec.143(3) regular assessment since there is no discussion in the assessment herein about the discovery of any fresh tangible material. No reply came from Revenue side. That being the case, I hereby quote CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Limited [2010] 187 Taxman 312 (SC) to hold that such a reopening is merely a ‘change of opinion’ which is not sustainable in law. Ordered accordingly.