Allowing the appeal of the assessee the the Tribunal held that , the power of reassessment is not akin to a review. The existence of tangible material is necessary to ensure against an arbitrary exercise of power. There is no tangible material in the present case.As per the mandate of law, even where a concluded assessment is sought to be reopened by the A.O within a period of 4 years from the end of the relevant assessment year, it is must that the A.O has fresh material or information with him, that had led to the formation of belief on his part that the income of the assessee chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. Followed NYK Lime (India) Ltd. v. DCIT (No.2) [2012] 346 ITR 361 (Bom) (HC) and Purity Tech Textile Pvt. Ltd. v . ACIT & Anr. [2010] 325 ITR 459 (Bom) (HC) . ( ITA No. 2344 / Mum /2018 / 1212 /Mum/2019 dt 22-07 -2020 ) (AY. 2012-13 )
Medley Pharmaceuticals Ltd v ITO (2020) 118 taxmann.com 44.(Mum) (Trib) www.itatonline.org
S. 147 : Reassessment –With in four years-Change of opinion – No new tangible material – “freebies” to doctors – sales promotion expenses -The code of conduct prescribed by the Medical Council is applicable only to medical practitioners/ doctors registered with the MCI and does not apply to pharmaceutical companies & the healthcare sector in any manner- Reassessment is held to be not valid . [ S.37(1), 148 ]