Director of Income Tax (IT)-II v. M/s.International Global Networks BV
[Citation -2014-LL-1212-1]

Citation 2014-LL-1212-1
Appellant Name Director of Income Tax (IT)-II
Respondent Name M/s.International Global Networks BV
Court HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 12/12/2014
Assessment Year 2004-05
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags change of opinion • double taxation
Bot Summary: h. ig CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI A.A. SAYED, JJ. H DATED : 12 DECEMBER 2014 P.C. This Appeal of the Revenue challenges the order y passed by the Tribunal in the Assessee's Appeal being Income Tax ba Appeal No.6314/M/2010 for the Assessment Year 2004-05. The Dispute Resolution Panel-1 -Mumbai passed an order on 7 May 2010, which was assailed and challenged by the Assessee before the Tribunal. The Assessee raised several B grounds, but page 36 of the Paper Book would reveal that grounds Nos.2, 3 4 were without prejudice to ground No.1. Ground No.1 of the Assessee's Memo of Appeal before rt the Tribunal reads as under: ou The Learned AO has erred in reopening the assessment proceedings originally completed under section 143(3) of the Act, without appreciating that no new fact/material has come into the knowledge of the Learned AO, evidencing C escapement of income. On ground No.1, the argument of the Assessee was h that there is no material to indicate as to how inclusion of interest on ig income tax refund under Article 11 of the Double Taxation Avoidance H Agreement was incorrect and leading to the Assessing Officer to issue notice under section 148. The Tribunal allowed ground No.1 in the Assessee's Memo of Appeal, reproduced above. Since, we are of the view that the Appeal does not raise any substantial om question of law on question No.2, by keeping open other questions and for being decided in a appropriate case, we dismiss this B Revenue's Appeal.


1/3 itxa-1579-12.doc IN HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION rt INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1579 OF 2012 ou Director of Income Tax (IT)-II ...Appellant v/s. M/s.International Global Networks BV ...Respondent C Mr.Tejveer Singh for Appellant. Mr.Porus Kaka, Sr.Advocate i/b Atul Jasani for Respondent. h .. ig CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI & A.A. SAYED, JJ. H DATED : 12 DECEMBER 2014 P.C. This Appeal of Revenue challenges order y passed by Tribunal in Assessee's Appeal being Income Tax ba Appeal No.6314/M/2010 for Assessment Year 2004-05. om 2. Dispute Resolution Panel-1 -Mumbai passed order on 7 May 2010, which was assailed and challenged by Assessee before Tribunal. Assessee raised several B grounds, but page 36 of Paper Book would reveal that grounds Nos.2, 3 & 4 were without prejudice to ground No.1. Uday Kambli 1/3 ::: Downloaded on - 11/08/2015 16:15:12 ::: 2/3 itxa-1579-12.doc 3. Ground No.1 of Assessee's Memo of Appeal before rt Tribunal reads as under: ou Learned AO has erred in reopening assessment proceedings originally completed under section 143(3) of Act, without appreciating that no new fact/material has come into knowledge of Learned AO, evidencing C escapement of income. 4. On ground No.1, argument of Assessee was h that there is no material to indicate as to how inclusion of interest on ig income tax refund under Article 11 of Double Taxation Avoidance H Agreement (DTAA) was incorrect and leading to Assessing Officer to issue notice under section 148. argument was that all relevant details concerning this aspect was before Assessing y Officer and duly placed by Assessee. If proceedings were ba initiated on mere change of opinion, then that was impermissible in light of law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in om case of Commissioner of CIT Vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. , (2010) 320 ITR 561. Hon'ble Suprme Court concluded B that no reassessment can be done on mere change of opinion. Tribunal in this case rejected Departmental Representative's contention and concluded that if Assessing Officer after due application of mind decides particular issue in particular manner Uday Kambli 2/3 ::: Downloaded on - 11/08/2015 16:15:12 ::: 3/3 itxa-1579-12.doc in original assessment, then he cannot initiate reassessment rt proceedings without there being any fresh material coming to his ou notice. Apart there from, in this case proceedings have been initiated on mere change of opinion, but in relation to same facts which were on record at time of completing original C assessment. That was found to be impermissible in view of law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court. finding of fact on h pages 39 to 41 in para 6 of order of Tribunal, therefore, goes ig to root of case. Tribunal, therefore, allowed ground No.1 in Assessee's Memo of Appeal, reproduced above. H 5. We are of view that substantial questions of law y at page 4 of Paper Book, being questions Nos. 1 & 3, need not ba be gone into and decided in facts of present case. Since, we are of view that Appeal does not raise any substantial om question of law on question No.2, by keeping open other questions and for being decided in appropriate case, we dismiss this B Revenue's Appeal. same is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. (A.A. SAYED, J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI,J.) Uday Kambli 3/3 ::: Downloaded on - 11/08/2015 16:15:12 ::: Director of Income Tax (IT)-II v. M/s.International Global Networks BV
Report Error