ORDER SHEET IN HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction [Income Tax] ORIGINAL SIDE ITA 275 of 2006 SANJOY SAHA Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX XIV, kolkata BEFORE: Hon'ble JUSTICE GIRISH CHANDRA GUPTA Hon'ble JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA Date : 13th March, 2015. Mr. J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Adv. with Mr. S. Bhowmick, Adv. Mr. M.P. Agarwalla, Adv. with Md. Nizamuddin, Adv. Court : appeal is directed against order dated 31st March, 2006 pertaining to assessment year 2002-03 by which learned Tribunal held that exercise of power under Section 147 was partly good and partly bad. With regard to expenses in connection with telephone, learned Tribunal was of opinion that re-assessment amounted to fishing enquiry over concluded affairs but with regard to purchase of goods, learned Tribunal held otherwise though reasons therefor were not spelt out. It is not in dispute that reassessment proceedings were initiated on basis that assessee had been granted allowance in respect of loss on sale of motor car. That was limited ground for 2 reassessment. assessee conceded that he had made mistake. Therefore, matter should have rested there. But assessing officer opened new front and held that telephone expenditure should not have been allowed and part of purchases should also not be allowed because payments were made in cash or otherwise than by crossed cheque. It was contended by assessee that payments were made to agent for purpose of procuring agricultural produce which was perfectly legal and justified and permitted under rules. learned Tribunal held that reassessment proceeding pertaining to telephone expenditure was bad, but with regard to reassessment proceeding pertaining to part of purchases have been remitted back to assessing officer. Aggrieved by order of learned Tribunal assessee has come up in appeal. After hearing learned advocates for parties, we find that learned Tribunal has not spelt out any reasons as to why two questions, namely, telephone expenditure and purchases, were differently treated. Whether assessing officer tried to rake up concluded affair which amounted to change of opinion when he sought to disallow part of purchases and telephone expenditure is also point in issue which needed consideration. We are at same time not inclined to stop factual enquiry required by order passed by learned Tribunal. In that view of matter, order under challenge to extent indicated above, is set aside. assessing officer shall adjudicate issue and furnish report to learned Tribunal. learned Tribunal shall at that stage consider matter afresh in accordance with law as to whether exercise of power under Section 147 in facts and circumstances was permissible. Needless to mention that in event assessing officer is satisfied that payments are not to be disallowed 3 then there shall be no occasion for learned Tribunal to consider matter afresh. appeal is, thus, disposed of. (GIRISH CHANDRA GUPTA, J.) (ARINDAM SINHA, J.) sm Sanjoy Saha v. Commissioner of Income-tax XIV, Kolkata