IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH B, PUNE BEFORE SHRI I.C. SUDHIR AND SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO ITA NO. 1754/PN/07 (ASSTT. YEAR 2001-02) PRIMA PAPER ENGINEERING PVT. LTD. T-73 MIDC PUNE 411026 MAHARASHTRA PAN NO. AABCP1938J .... APPELLANT VS. ITO, WARD 8(3), PUNE . RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI M.R. BHAGWAT RESPONDENT BY : SHRI HEMANTKUMAR C. LEUVA ORDER PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO AM THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE CIT(A)-III, PUNE DATED 28/09/2007 FOR A.Y 2001-02. THE GROUNDS RA ISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE AS UNDER:- 1. THE A.O ERRED IN PASSING [AND CIT(APPEALS) ERRED IN UPHOLDING] THE ASSESSMENT U/S. 143(3) READ WITH SECTION 147 WHICH IS BAD IN LAW. 2. THE A.O ERRED IN [AND CIT(APPEALS) ERRED IN UPHO LDING] DISALLOWING THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U/S. 80IA AMOUNTING TO RS. 2 8,14,000/-.' 2. AT THE VERY OUTSET, LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE M ENTIONED THAT GROUND NO. 1 RELATES TO VALIDITY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED U/S. 147 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. IN THIS REGARD, LD COUNSEL TOOK US TO THE PAPER BOOK TO D EMONSTRATE THAT THE REASONS FOR REOPENING RELATES TO CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U/ S. 80IA(4)(IV((A) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, THE ISSUE WAS ALREADY DISCUSSED AND DELIBERATED BY THE A.O DURING THE REGULAR SCRUTINY PROCEEDINGS U/S. 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, THE FIRST ROUND OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. TO SUPPORT T HE SAME, LD COUNSEL REFERRED TO THE NOTICE DATED 21/10/2002 ISSUED BY THE AO U/S 142 OF THE ACT AND ITA NO.1754/PN/07 A.Y 2001-02 PAGE 2 OF 3 THE LIST OF DETAILS WANTED BY THE AO FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE REGULAR ASSESSMENT. FURTHER, HE READ OUT THE ITEM NO 23 OF THE SAID LIST W HICH READS THAT,- 23. DETAILED NOTE ON CLAIM OF 80IA(4)(IV)(A). FURTHER, LD. COUNSEL REFERRED TO THE COPY OF THE ORDER-SH EET PLACED IN THE PAPER BOOK FOR DEMONSTRATING THE FACT OF FILING OF THE RELE VANT DETAILS IN REPLY TO THE ABOVE QUARRY ON 29/04/2003. FURTHER, THE COUNSEL ALSO D EMONSTRATED FROM THE REASONS FOR REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT THAT THE REASON FOR THE AO WANED T O REOPEN IS ONE AND THE SAME I.E., CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U/S 80IA OF THE ACT. FINALLY, LD COUNSEL ARGUED STATING THAT THE REOPENING IS MERELY AN EXERCISE RESULTANT OF CHANGE OF OPINION . ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. DR FOR THE REVENUE RELIED ON THE RELEVANT ORDERS OF THE REVENUE. 3. WE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES ON THIS ISSUE RELATING T O VALIDITY OF THE IMPUGNED NOTICE ISSUED U/S. 147 OF THE ACT. IN THE LIGHT OF THE PLETHORA OF EVIDENCES MENTIONED ABOVE, WE FIND NO DIFFICULTY IN COMING TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THE ISSUE OF DEDUCTION U/S 80IA WAS SUBJECT MA TTER OF A SPECIFIC ENQUIRY BY THE AO DURING THE REGULAR ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. CONSI DERING THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE FURNISHED THE REQUISITE INFORMATION ON 29/04/ 2003 AND THERE IS ENTRY IN THE ORDER-SHEET TO THAT EXTENT, IT IS REASONABLE TO I NFER THAT THERE EXISTS AN OPINION ON THE SUBJECT WHILE MAKING THE SAID REGULAR ASSESSMENT. IN THIS FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE REA SONS RECORDED AND THE NOTICE ISSUED U/S. 147 FOR REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMEN T IS NOT VALID, THUS, IT IS A CASE OF CHANGE OF OPINION. THERE IS PLETHORA OF JUDGEMENT ON SUBJECT TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY, GROUND NO. 1 IS ALLOWED. 4. GROUND NO. 2 RELATES TO QUANTUM OF DISALLOWANCE. T HE ADJUDICATION OF THIS GROUND IS MERELY AN ACADEMIC EXERCISE IN VIEW OF OR FIN DING OF GROUND NO. 1. ACCORDINGLY, GROUND NO. 2 IS TREATED AS INFRUCTUOUS . 5. IN THE RESULT APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 08 TH OCTOBER, 2010. SD/- SD/- (I.C. SUDHIR) (D.KARUNAKARA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBE R PUNE DATED THE 08 TH OCTOBER, 2010 R ITA NO.1754/PN/07 A.Y 2001-02 PAGE 3 OF 3 COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1. ASSESSEE 2. ITO, WARD 8(3), PUNE 3 CIT-(A)-III, PUNE 4 CIT-V, PUNE 5 D.R. ITAT B BENCH BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR I.T.A.T PUNE