Commissioner of Income-tax v. Pithampur Steels (P.) Ltd
[Citation -2008-LL-0102-3]

Citation 2008-LL-0102-3
Appellant Name Commissioner of Income-tax
Respondent Name Pithampur Steels (P.) Ltd.
Court HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 02/01/2008
Assessment Year 1995-96
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags reason to believe • sales-tax
Bot Summary: The Revenue being aggrieved by order passed by the Tribunal No. 226/Ind/2005 dt. The assessee remained unsuccessful before the appellate forum he went to the Tribunal. The Tribunal after hearing the parties allowed the appeal the Revenue is before this Court. From the order passed by the Tribunal, it appears that after placing its k reliance upon certain judgments of the Supreme Court and other High Courts, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that in a case where there is change in the opinion, the AO would not be entitled to reopen the assessment. From the facts, it would clearly appear that the refund of Rs. 25,00,000 from the Department was already available on the records. Despite availability of this fact if the amount was not included in the income of the assessee then simply on change of the opinion the AO could not reopen the assessment. In our opinion, the Tribunal was not unjustified in granting the relief to the assessee.


Shri R.L. Jain, learned senior counsel with Sushri Veena Mandlik, learned counsel for appellant. Heard on question of admission. Revenue being aggrieved by order passed by Tribunal No. 226/Ind/2005 dt. 20th July, 2007 for asst. yr. 1995-96 is before this Court with submission that Tribunal was not justified in directing to refuse deduction under ss. 80HH and 80-I on amount of sales-tax refund. bone of contention was refund of sum of Rs. 25,00,000 by Sales- tax Department. Undisputedly, this amount was already shown in return filed by present respondent. AO after taking into consideration totality of circumstances and on facts available before it did not include amount of refund in income and allowed it to be deducted. After change of AO, new incumbent probably took up matter on scrutiny and on change of opinion came to conclusion that Department was to suffer loss if this amount of Rs. 25,00,000 was not included in income of assessee. He accordingly took up matter, issued notices and after hearing assessee made addition to returned income. assessee remained unsuccessful before appellate forum, therefore, he went to Tribunal. Tribunal after hearing parties allowed appeal, therefore, Revenue is before this Court. Shri Jain, learned senior counsel for appellant after taking us through judgment of Supreme Court in matter of Asstt. CIT vs. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. (2007) 210 CTR (SC) 30: (2007) 291 ITR 500 (SC) submitted that AO must have reason to believe to reopen assessment and it is not necessary for him to have established facts for reopening assessment. It is also submitted that even if strict rule to established fact i s applied then too fact that there was refund of Rs. 25,00,000 from Sales-tax Department was available on record. From order passed by Tribunal, it appears that after placing its k reliance upon certain judgments of Supreme Court and other High Courts, Tribunal came to conclusion that in case where there is change in opinion, AO would not be entitled to reopen assessment. From facts, it would clearly appear that refund of Rs. 25,00,000 from Department was already available on records. Despite availability of this fact if amount was not included in income of assessee then simply on change of opinion AO could not reopen assessment. In our opinion, Tribunal was not unjustified in granting relief to assessee. appeal deserves to and is accordingly dismissed. *** Commissioner of Income-tax v. Pithampur Steels (P.) Ltd
Report Error