In the course of assessment proceedings the Assessing Officer has\u00a0 raised\u00a0 a specific \u00a0query \u00a0as regards the applicability of the section 50C of the Act . After considering the submission of the petitioner the proposed addition was dropped . After the judgement of the supreme Court in UOI v. Ashish Agarwal\u00a0 (2022 ) 444 ITR 1 \u00a0(SC) \u00a0\u00a0the reassessment proceedings were initiated against\u00a0 \u00a0the petitioner on the basis of\u00a0 Internal Audit\u00a0 objection .\u00a0 The objection of the petitioner was rejected \u00a0and an order was passed under section 148A(d) of the Act . On writ the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order was various grounds . One of the grounds was as the alleged information from the Internal Audit and not from the Comptroller and Auditor General of India \u00a0hence \u00a0the reassessment proceedings are bad in law.\u00a0 The petitioner has also raised the grounds\u00a0 on \u00a0change of opinion . \u00a0\u00a0Allowing the petition the Court held that , information\u00a0 from\u00a0 Internal Audit objection is\u00a0 not\u00a0 permissible\u00a0 as the information\u00a0 was\u00a0 not based on the\u00a0 objection raised by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India .Court also held that\u00a0 audit objection raised by\u00a0 CAG\u00a0 a view deviating from that which was taken in the course of original assessment order is change of opinion\u00a0\u00a0 which is impermissible\u00a0 . (WPNo. 4574 of 2022 dt 8. 11-2023 ) ( AY. 2015 -16 )<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
S. 148A: Reassessment – Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice – Information \u2013 Internal Audit objection- Not permissible \u2013 Change of opinion -Information not based on the objection raised by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India \u2013 Reassessment impermissible- Change of opinion- Audit objection raised by CAG a view deviating from that which was taken in the course of original assessment order is change of opinion -Impermissible . [ S. 45, 48, 50C, 148 ,148A(b), 148A(d), 151 Art. 226 ]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-37927","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-9RJ","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/37927","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=37927"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/37927\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":42668,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/37927\/revisions\/42668"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=37927"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=37927"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=37927"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}