The assessee claimed the benefit under section 80HHC of the Act. The assessee claimed deduction of bad debt on the ground that, in the earlier year, the export did not materialise. Proceedings under section 154 of the Act were initiated by the Department for the 1995-96. During the pendency of the proceedings, the Department also reopened the assessment.  The Tribunal set aside the reassessment proceedings under section 148 of the Act holding that as the proceedings under section 154 initiated against the assessee were pending, no reopening proceedings under section 147 / 148 of the Act could have been initiated. The High Court allowed the Department’s appeal and remanded the matter to the Tribunal observing that as the proceedings under section 154 were beyond the period of limitation prescribed under section 154(7) of the Act, the reopening proceedings under section 147 / 148 were maintainable. A review application preferred by the assessee was dismissed. On appeals allowing the appeal the Court held that the proceedings under section 154 of the Act were not the subject-matter before the High Court. There was nothing on record to show that, in fact, the notice under section 154 of the Act was withdrawn on the ground that it was beyond the period of limitation prescribed under section 154(7) of the Act. In the absence of any specific order of withdrawal of the proceedings under section 154 of the Act, the proceedings initiated under section 154 of the Act could be said to have been pending. In that view of the matter, during the pendency of the proceedings under section 154 of the Act, it was not permissible on the part of the Department to initiate proceedings under section 147 / 148 of the Act. The High Court was wrong in presuming that the proceedings under section 154 were invalid because they were beyond the period of limitation. The judgment of the High Court was unsustainable. The order passed by the Tribunal was to be restored. (AY.1995-96)