The assessment was completed u/s. 143(3) of the Act. Notice was issued u/s 148 of the Act on 27-3-2019, after expiry of four years. Recorded reasons stated that basis of re-opening is due to mistake of the Assessing Officer that resulted in under assessment. On writ High Court quashed the reassessment notice. On SLP by the Revenue dismissing the petition, the court held that the assessment was sought to be re-opened beyond four years. Therefore, all the conditions under section 148 of the Act for reopening the assessment beyond four years were to be satisfied. The reassessment was on a change of opinion. There were no allegations of suppression of material fact. Under the circumstances, no error had been committed by the High Court in setting aside the reopening notice under section 148 of the Act. Decision of the Bombay High Court affirmed. (AY.2012-13)
ACIT v. CEAT Ltd. (2022)449 ITR 171 / 218 DTR 441/ 329 CTR 227/(2023) 291 Taxman 435 (SC) Editorial: CEAT Ltd. v. ACIT (2023) 291 Taxman 366 (Bom.)(HC) www.itatonline.org
S. 147 : Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-Change of opinion-No failure to disclose material facts-Mistake of Assessing Officer-Error discovered reconsideration of same facts does not give power to the Assessing Officer to reopen the assessment-Reassessment notice and order disposal of objection was quashed-Order of High Court affirmed. [S. 148, Art. 136]