Kalyani Chaturvedi, Agra vs Department Of Income Tax on 24 February, 2014
4. On the other hand, the ld. counsel for the assessee reiterated the submissions
made before the authorities below and submitted that the same seized material,
Annexure A1 was considered at the original assessment stage, on which part
addition was made which has been deleted by the ld. CIT(A) and confirmed by the
Tribunal and, therefore, on identical facts and same material on record, the
subsequent AO on mere change of opinion should not have reopened the
assessment. He has relied upon the decision of full Bench of Delhi High Court in
the case of CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd., 256 ITR 01, order of ITAT, Mumbai
Bench in the case of Chika Overseas (P) Ltd. vs. ITO, 131 ITD 471 and order of
ITAT, Agra Bench in the case of ITO vs. Shri Haresh Chand Agarwal HUF in ITA
No. 282/Agra/2013 dated 20.12.2013.