Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 11 (0.22 seconds)Section 147 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Commnr. Of Income Tax, Delhi vs M/S. Kelvinator Of India Ltd on 18 January, 2010
21. It is apparent from the above that the conclusion drawn by the Assessing
Officer that the cost of fixed assets of the petitioner company has been met by the
Government is based on the capital structure as was recorded in various
documents including the Office Memorandum dated 30.09.2000 issued by the
Ministry of Telecommunication, Government of India. Whereas the earlier
Assessing Officer had not thought it fit to conclude that the cost of the fixed
assets were required to be reduced to the extent of the reserves during the first
round of assessment, the reasons as recorded disclose that this was sought to be
done by reopening the assessment. This in our view represents a clear change in
the opinion without there being any further "tangible material" to warrant the
same. It is trite law that a mere change of opinion cannot be a reason for
reassessing income under Section 147 of the Act. The Supreme Court in the case
of CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. (SC) (Supra) has held as under:-
Section 143 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 115JB in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
The Companies Act, 1956
Section 43 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Commissioner Of Income Tax-Vi, New ... vs Usha International Limited on 21 September, 2012
The learned counsel also cited the decision of this court of in the
case of CIT v. Usha International Ltd.: (2012) 348 ITR 485 (Del.)