Case Law Details
ACIT Vs Joseph Selvakumar Selvan (ITAT Chennai)
Upon careful consideration, it could be gathered that the return of income was already scrutinized u/s 143(3) and the issue of computation of capital gain was duly examined by Ld. AO. The requisite queries were raised by Ld. AO which were duly replied by the assessee along with documentary evidences. Having satisfied with the assessee’s replies, Ld. AO accepted the claim of the assessee. Subsequently, the case was reopened on the basis of audit objection wherein an opinion was expressed that the gains so earned should be assessed as ‘Business Income’. However, both the views are legally The Ld. AO, with due application of mind, adopted one of the views during regular assessment proceedings. Thereafter, without there being any fresh intangible material on record, Ld. AO proceeded to reopen the case merely to change the head of income. It is trite law that review of the order, on same set of facts and material, is impermissible. Therefore, we have no hesitation to hold that the reopening was merely on the basis of change of opinion. Accordingly, no fault could be found in the impugned order.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT CHENNAI
Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member)
1. Aforesaid appeal by Revenue for Assessment Year (AY) 2013-14 arises out of the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-10, Chennai [CIT(A)] dated 25-02-2020 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act on 26-11-2018. The grounds taken by the Revenue read as under:
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
