Case Law Details

Case Name : Replika Press Pvt. Ltd. & Anr Vs. ACIT (Delhi High Court)
Appeal Number : WP(C) 13838/2009
Date of Judgement/Order : 22/01/2013
Related Assessment Year :
Courts : All High Courts (4474) Delhi High Court (1327)
Replika Press Pvt. Ltd. & Anr Vs. ACIT, WP(C) 13838/2009, Date of order: 22-01-2013, High Court of Delhi
This is a clear case of change of opinion as also a case which was beyond the jurisdiction of the revenue audit which had pointed to the so-called discrepancies on points of law, particularly, on an interpretation of Section 10B of the said Act.

Insofar as the change of opinion is concerned, it is writ large from the records of the case. The Assessing Officer had specifically raised a query with regard to the supplies made in the domestic tariff area and the petitioner / assessee had given a detailed reply to the same. The Assessing Officer, after considering the reply furnished by the assessee, framed the assessment order in which, as we have pointed out above, he made specific references to exports in the domestic tariff area and / or constructive exports. While computing the claim for exemption under Section 10B, the Assessing Officer has included the supply made in the domestic tariff area, both in the main body of the assessment order as also in Annexure-A thereto, which was the calculation of the deductions. Therefore, it is absolutely clear that the Assessing Officer had applied his mind to the very issue which is now sought to be raised under Section 147 of the said Act. That would mean that the present venture of  invoking Section 147 is nothing but a mere change of opinion, which is impermissible in law, as is well settled by a long line of decisions. The second point of the petitioner is also well taken that an audit party could not have commented on a point of law and, particularly, on an interpretation of Section 10B of the said Act.

Download Judgment/Order

More Under Income Tax

Posted Under

Category : Income Tax (28576)
Type : Judiciary (12873)
Tags : high court judgments (4792) Reassessment (278) section 147 (487) section 148 (414)

0 responses to “Reopening not permissible for mere change of opinion”

  1. Nem Singh says:

    There are land mark judgments on the principle of “change of opinion” but department always use their discrationary power and never consider the case of the assessee.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *