Court held that questionnaire issued to assessee during assessment proceedings and assessment order passed on that basis made it clear that no information with regard to DEPB or Duty Draw Back was furnished by assessee. There was indeed no adjudication on that aspect of matter and, therefore, concurrent view taken by lower authorities could not be faulted with. Assessee failed to show from record whether AO had indeed considered issue of allowability of deduction u/s 10BA in respect of Duty Draw Back. Had this issued been actually considered, some query would certainly have been raised on this aspect and reply thereto, if any, would also was submitted by assessee, Obviously, AO did not apply his mind to this aspect of the matter. Since assessee failed to point out that AO formed any opinion on this issue, it could not be held that initiation of re-assessment proceedings u/s 148 was based on mere change of opinion. It was only when AO later realized that deduction u/s 10BA was not allowable in respect to Duty Draw Back and that exemption was allowed on account of this mistake, he initiated re-assessment proceedings by recourse to s. 148. Duty Draw Back and other such incentives were not profits derived from eligible business and accordingly exemption u/s 10BA could not be allowed in respect of Duty Draw Back and other export incentives. Matter was remanded back to AO to decide same afresh in accordance with law, however, leaving it open for both parties to raise all contentions before AO. Matter remanded. (AY. 2008 -09)