Case Law Details
Jagdish U. Thackersey Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai)
It is well settled that mere fresh application of mind to the same set of facts or mere change of opinion does not confer jurisdiction even under the post-1989 section 147. The consistent view is that even after amendment of section 147 (w.e.f. 01.04.1989) mere change of opinion does not confer jurisdiction on the Assessing Officer to initiate proceedings for re-assessment merely by resorting to Explanation 1 to that section on the basis of change of opinion. Where, on the same material, the succeeding officer wants to take a different view than taken by the predecessor Assessing Officer and wants to take action u/s 147, such action cannot be sustained because the view taken by the subsequent officer is nothing but a change of opinion.
Mere change of opinion by Assessing Officer cannot be a ground for reassessment and that amendment of section 147 w.e.f. 01.04.1989 has not altered the position- the Assessing Officer must have reason to believe that income has escaped assessment ; the Assessing Officer does not have the power of review on the same set of facts and law.
It is the duty of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts which is termed as primary facts. Non-disclosure of other facts which may be termed as secondary facts is not necessary.
Assessee in the instant case disclosed all the primary facts necessary for assessment of its case to the Assessing Office. Thus a mere change of opinion by the AO in the instant case cannot be a ground for reassessment.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
