ACIT CIR. - 1(1), MUMBAI V. M/s. ALSTOM PROJECTS INDIA LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 3052/MUM/2008

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 100699 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 year(s) 3 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-08-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Next Hearing Date: 17-08-2015
• Assessment Year: 2001-2002
• Appeal Filed On: 05-05-2008
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: J D MISTRY
• Keywords: Reopening of assessment; Depreciation; Tangible material; Bad and doubtful debts; Difference of opinion; Scheme of amalgamation; Revised return; Reason to believe; Unabsorbed depreciation; Change of opinion
• Section: 143(3); 115JB; 32; 147; 148

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL E BENCH, MUMBAI , , , BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K . BILLAIYA, A CCOUNTANT M EMBER / I .T.A. NO. 3052/MUM/2008 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2001 - 02 THE ACIT - 1(1), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, MUMBAI - 400 020 / VS. M/S. ALSTOM PROJECTS INDIA LTD., THE INTERNATIONAL, 5 TH FLOOR, 16 MARINE LINES, CROSS ROAD NO. 1, OFF M.K. ROAD, CURCHGATE MUMBAI - 400 020 C.O. NO. 181/M/2008 (ARISING OUT OF I .T.A. NO . 3052/MUM/2008 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2001 - 02 M/S. ALSTOM PROJECTS INDIA LTD., THE INTERNATIONAL, 5 TH FLOOR, 16 MARINE LINES, CROSS ROAD NO. 1, OFF M.K. ROAD, CURCHGATE MUMBAI - 400 020 / VS. THE ACIT - 1(1), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, MUMBAI - 400 020 ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. : AABCA 8679F ( / APPELLANT ) .. / A SSESSEE BY: SHRI J.D. MISTRY / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI NEERAJ SHETH / DATE OF HEARING : 17 . 0 8 .2015 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21 .0 8 .2015 ITA. NO . 3052/M/08 C.O. NO. 181/M/08 2 / O R D E R PER N.K. BILLAIYA, AM: THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE AND THE CROSS OBJECTION BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE VERY SAME ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) - 1 MUMBAI DT. 22.2.2008 PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 1 - 0 2 . AS THESE WERE HEARD TOGETHER, THEY ARE DISPOSED OF BY THIS COMMON ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE AND BREVITY. 2. IN ITS CROSS OBJECTION, THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED THE VALIDITY OF THE REOPENING OF THE COMPLETED ASSESSMENT U/S. 147 OF THE ACT. AS T HE ISSUES RAISED IN THE CROSS OBJECTION GO TO THE ROOT OF THE MATTER, WE DECIDED TO TAKE THE CROSS OBJECTION FIRST. 3. THE GROUNDS OF CROSS OBJECTION READ AS UNDER: 1. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCE OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN UP HOLDING THE ACTION OF THE DCIT, CIRCLE - 1(1) IN REOPENING THE ASSESSMENT U/S. 147 OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961. 2. HE FAILED TO APPRECIATE AND OUGHT TO HAVE HELD THAT I) THE REASSESSMENT WAS NOT JUSTIFIED AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT. II) THE APPELLANT HAD FULLY DI SCLOSED THE RELEVANT FACTS WITH THE RETURN OF INCOME. III) MERELY A CHANGE IN THE OPINION CANNOT BE GROUND FOR REOPENING OF ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 147 OF THE ACT AND IV) ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE REOPENING WAS UNJUSTIFIED, UNWARR ANTED AND BAD IN LAW. 4. IN THIS CASE, THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT WAS MADE U/S. 143(3) OF THE ACT BY ORDER DATED 31.12.2003 WHEREIN NORMAL INCOME WAS COMPUTED AT ITA. NO . 3052/M/08 C.O. NO. 181/M/08 3 RS. NIL AND BOOK PROFIT U/S. 115JB WAS COMPUTED AT RS. 12,69,59,799/ - . BY NOTICE DATED 30.3.2 006 ISSUED U/S. 148 OF THE ACT, THE COMPLETED ASSESSMENT WAS SOUGHT TO BE REOPENED. IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE U/S. 148, THE ASSESSEE FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME ON 20.4.2006 THOUGH THE ASSESSEE STRONGLY OBJECTED FOR REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT. 4.1. AFTER CONSIDERING AND SIMULTANEOUSLY DISMISSING ASSESSEES OBJECTIONS, THE REASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED BY MAKING DISALLOWANCE OF PROVISIONS FOR BAD AND DOUBTFUL DEBTS OF RS. 3,37,14,000/ - UNDER THE MAT FOR WORKING OUT BOOK PROFIT U/S. 115JB. FURTHER, THE A O HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT ENTITLED FOR SET OFF OF LOSSES. ACCORDING TO THE AO, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FULFILLED THE CONDITIONS PROVIDED IN THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 72A(2) OF THE ACT. ACCORDINGLY, THE REASSESSMENT ORDER WAS MADE U/S. 143(3) R.W. SEC. 147 OF THE ACT BY ORDER DATED 29.12.2006. 5. THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND VIDE GROUND NO. 1 CHALLENGED THE REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT U/S. 147 OF THE ACT. AFTER CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND THE SUBMISSIONS, THE LD. CIT(A) OBSER VED THAT THE PRINCIPLE RELATING TO THE CHANGE OF OPINION WILL NOT BE APPLICABLE AND ACCORDINGLY UPHELD THE ACTION OF THE AO. THE CROSS OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THIS DECISION OF THE LD. CIT(A). 6. AT THE VERY OUTSELF, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT THE AO HAS REOPENED THE COMPLETED ASSESSMENT WITHOUT BRINGING ANY TANGIBLE MATERIAL EVIDENCE ON RECORD WHICH COULD SUGGEST THAT THERE WAS AN ESCAPEMENT OF INCOME OR THE INCOME HAS BEEN UNDER ASSESSED. REFERRING TO THE REASONS REC ORDED FOR THE REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT, THE LD. COUNSEL POINTED OUT THAT THE FIRST REASON RELATES TO THE PROVISION FOR BAD AND DOUBTFUL DEBTS OF RS. 3,37,14,000/ - . IT IS THE SAY OF THE LD. COUNSEL THAT THE COMPLETED ASSESSMENT HAS BEEN REOPENED TO TAX THIS AMOUNT U/S. ITA. NO . 3052/M/08 C.O. NO. 181/M/08 4 115JB OF THE ACT. REFERRING TO THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY IN THE CASE OF CIT VS E CHJAY FORGINGS PVT. LTD. 251 ITR 15. THE LD. COUNSEL STATED THAT IT WAS A SETTLED PROPOSITION OF LAW THAT PROVISIONS FOR DEBTS HAVE TO BE EXCLUDED FROM THE NET PROFIT FOR WORKING OUT BOOK PROFIT U/S. 115JB OF THE ACT. THE LD. COUNSEL FURTHER POINTED OUT THAT THE RATIO LAID DOWN BY THE H ONBLE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY WAS CONFIRMED BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS HCL COMNET SYSTEMS AND SERVICES LTD. THUS, IT CAN BE SAFELY CONCLUDED THAT THE REOPENING BASED ON TO CONSIDER THIS PROVISION OF BAD AND DOUBTFUL DEBT IS BAD IN LA W AND IS AGAINST THE SETTLED PROPOSITION OF LAW. 6.1. THE SECOND REASON RELATES TO THE FACT OF AMALGAMATION OF TWO COMPANIES WITH THE ASSESSEE AND WHETHER THE ASSESSEE HAS FULFILLED THE CONDITIONS LAID DOWN U/S. 72A(2) OF THE ACT WHICH ENTITLED IT FOR THE SET OFF OF ACCUMULATED LOSSES AND DEPRECIATION. IN THE OPINION OF THE AO, SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FULFILLED THE REQUIRED CONDITIONS , THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN GRANTED EXCESS ALLOWANCE OF LOSS AND DEPRECIATION AND THEREFORE THE COMPLETED ASSESSMENT NEE DS TO BE REOPENED. 6.2. THE LD. SENIOR COUNSEL VEHEMENTLY SUBMITTED THAT EVEN THIS REASON OF THE AO IS WITHOUT ANY NEW MATERIAL EVIDENCE INASMUCH AS THE BELIEF OF THE AO IS BASED ON THE SAME DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES WHICH WERE DULY EXAMINED AND VERIFIED BY THE AO DURING THE COURSE OF THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. 7. PER CONTRA, THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE SUPPORTED THE REASSESSMENT ORDER AND THE ORDER OF THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. 8. WE HAVE GIVEN A THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION TO THE ORD ERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. WE HAVE ALSO CONSIDERED THE RELEVANT DOCUMENTARY ITA. NO . 3052/M/08 C.O. NO. 181/M/08 5 EVIDENCES BROUGHT ON RECORD AND REFERRED TO DURING THE COURSE OF THE PROCEEDINGS. THE REASONS RECORDED BY THE AO FOR REOPENING THE ASSESSMENT READ AS UNDER: THE ASSESSMENT WA S COMPLETED U/S.143(3) ON 31/12/2003 AT INCOME U/S. 115 JB AT RS.12.59,57.792/ - . THE ASSESSEE HAS DEBITED A SUM FOR RS.3,37,14,000/ - ON ACCOUNT OF PROVISION FOR DOUBTFUL DEBTS AND ADVANCES. AS PER EXPLANATION TO SUB CLAUSE 2 OF THE SECTION 115JB. THE AMO UNT SET ASIDE TO PROVISIONS FOR MEETING LIABILITIES OTHER THAN ASCERTAINED LIABILITIES DEBITED TO P&L ACCOUNT SHALL BE ADDED TO BOOK PROFIT. THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAS DEBITED A SUM OF RS.3.37.14,000/ - ON ACCOUNT OF PROVISIONS FOR DOUBTFUL DEBTS AND ADVANCES . THEREFORE, THE ABOVE SUM HAS TO BE ADDED BACK FOR COMPUTING THE BOOK PROFITS U/S. 115JB AND THE SAME WAS NOT ADDED TO INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE DETERMINED U/S.115JB WHILE PASSING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, I HAVE REASON TO BELIEVE THAT INCO ME HAS ESCA P ED ASSESSMENT TO TUNE OF RS.3 , 37 , 14 ,000 FOR THE P UR PO SE OF DETERMI NING INCOME U/S. 115JB FOR THE RELEVANT YEAR UNDER CONS IDERATION . IT I S FURTHER NOTED THE ASSESSEE COMPANY IS ENGAGED I N THE B USINESS OF EXECUTING TURNKEY PROJECTS AND MANUFACTURING OF E L ECTRICAL ENGINEERING PRODUCTS , POLLUTION CONTROL EQUIPMENTS RENOVATION MODERNIZATION OF POWER PLANTS. THE INCOME O F THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAS BEEN DETERMINED AT RS.20,35,65.648/ - . THE BUSINESS LOSS OF AMALGAMATING COMPANY AGGREGATING TO R S.338.67.03,039/ - HA S BEEN ALLOWED TO SET OFF AGAINST THE INCOME DETERMI NED. IT IS SEEN THAT ALSTO M POWER BOILER LTD. AND ALSTOM TRANSPORT L T D. AMALGAMATED WITH THE ASSESSEE COMPANY ON 31/3/2001 AND ACCUMULATED BUSINESS LOSS INCLUDING UNABSORBED DEPRECI ATION A M OUNTIN G TO RS. 341,02,28,314 / - WAS ALLOWED FOR SET OFF. THE NATURE OF THE BUSINESS OF THESE AMALGAMATING COMPANY AND ALSO THE BOOK VALUE OF FIXED ASSETS HELD BY THESE COMPANIES AS ON THE DATE OF MERGER WAS AS UNDER: NAME OF THE COMPANY NATURE OF BUSINESS BOOK VALUE OF FIXED ALSTOM POWER BOILER LTD.ASSETS MANUFACTURER AND SUPPLIER OF BOILER CEMENT MACHINERY FOUNDRY CASTING 26879934 ALSTOM TRANSPORT LTD. MANUFACTURING SERVICE IN RAILWAY AND OTHER TRANSPORT EQUIPMENT 380231000 ASSESSEE COMPA NY EXECUTIVE TURNKEY PROJECTS AND MANUFACTURING OF ELECTRICAL 846666000 ITA. NO . 3052/M/08 C.O. NO. 181/M/08 6 ENGINEERING PRODUCTS, MODERNIZATION OF POWER PLANTS ETC. AS PER PROVISION OF SEC. 72A(2) THE ACCUMULATED LOSSES OF AMALGAMATING COMPANY ARE ALLOWED TO BE SET OFF FROM THE INCOME OF AMALGAMATED COMPANY SUBJECT TO CONDITION THAT A) 75% OF THE BOOKS VALUE OF ASSET IS TAKEN OVER BY THE AMALGAMATED COMPANY B) THE BUSINESS OF AMALGAMATING COMPANY REMAINS CONTINUOUS WITH THE AMALGAMATED COMPANY. THE 75% OF BOOK VALUE OF AMALGAMATING COMPANY AS SHOWN ABOVE WHICH AMOUNT TO RS.30,53,33,201/ - WAS NOT TAKEN OVER AND INCLUDED IN THE BOOK VA L UE OF RS.84,66,66, 000/ - . FURT HER THE NATURE OF BUSINESS OF AMALGAMATING COMPANY I.E. MANUFACTURING OF BOILER TRANSPORTATION OF RAI L WAY EQUIPMENTS ALSO REMAINS DISCONTINUED. IN VIEW OF THESE CONDITIONS SET OFF OF UNABSORBED BUSINESS LOSS/DEPRECIATION ALLOWED WAS NOT ELIGIBLE TO THE A SSESSEE AND THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN GRANTED EXCESS ALLOWANCE OF LOSS AND DEPRECIATION FOR THE YEAR TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 20,35,65,698/ - AGAINST PROFIT FOR THE CURRENT YEAR AND ALSO AN EXCESS ALLOWANCE OF CARRY FORWARD LOSS OF RS. 318,31,37,391/ - FO R FUTURE SET OFF AND THEREFORE IN ALL THE SUM OF RS. 338,67,03,039/ - HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE I HAVE REASON TO BELIEVE THAT INCOME ON ACCOUNT OF NON ADDITION OF PROVISION FOR DOUBTFUL DEBTS AND ADVAN CES OF RS.3,37,14, 000/ - TO INCOME U/S.115JB, UNDER WHICH THE ASSESSMENT W AS COMPLETED AND THE EXCESS SET OFF OF LOSS AND DEPRECIATION OF RS.33 8 ,67, 0 3 , 039/ - GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE UNDER THE INCOME DETERMINED AS PER NORMAL PROVISIONS OF THE ACT HAS ESCAPED A SSESSMENT FOR A . Y 2001 - 02 . 8.1. THUS IT IS CLEAR THAT THE COMPLETED ASSESSMENT HAS BEEN REOPENED FIRSTLY ON ACCOUNT OF NON ADDITION OF PROVISIONS FOR DOUBTFUL DEBTS TO INCOME U/S. 115JB OF THE ACT. 8.2. AS MENTIONED ELSEWHERE, THIS REASON DO NOT HOLD A NY WATER AS THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT HAS BEEN COMPLETED WHICH IS BASED ON THE SETTLED PROPOSITION OF THE LAW AS LAID DOWN BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF HCL C OMNET SYSTEMS AND SERVICES LTD. (SUPRA). ITA. NO . 3052/M/08 C.O. NO. 181/M/08 7 9. THE SECOND REASON GIVEN FOR THE REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT IS THAT EXCESS SET OFF OF LOSS AND DEPRECIATION HAS BEEN GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE UNDER THE INCOME DETERMINED AS PER NORMAL PROVISIONS OF THE LAW. A PERUSAL OF THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT ORDER SHOW S THE FOLLOWING OBSERVATIONS MADE BY THE AO. THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED THE ACCUMULATED BUSINESS LOSSES AND UNABSORBED DEPRECIATION OF AM ALGAMATED COMPANIES IN THE REVISED RETURN. 10. THE FACTS RELA T ING TO THIS ISSUE ARE THAT M/S. ALSTOM POWER BOILERS LTD. & ALSTOM TRANSPORT LTD AMALGAMATE D WITH THE ASSESSEE COMPANY ON 31.3.2001. IN ITS REVISED COMPUTATION OF INCOME, THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED SET OFF OF BUSINESS LOSS OF THE AMALGAMATING COMPANY AMOUNTING TO RS. 341,02,28,314/ - WHICH WAS ALLOWED BY THE AO IN THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT ORDER. IN THE NOTES APPENDED TO THE REVISED COMPUTATION OF INCOME AT POINT NO. 2A(1), THE ASSESSEE HAS EX PLAINED AS UNDER: A (I) BY ORDERS OF HONBLE DELHI AND MUMBAI HIGH COURTS U/S. 391 AND 394 OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956, THREE CLOSELY - HELD COMPANIES I.E. ALSTOM SYSTEMS LTD (ASL), ALSTOM TRANSPORT LTD (ATL) AND ALSTOM POWER BOILERS LTD (APBL) HAVE BEEN AMALGAMATED WITH THE COMPANY (WHICH IS WIDELY HELD COMPANY) AS PER THE SCHEME OF AMALGAMATION. ON COMPLYING WITH THE REQUISITE REGULATORY FORMALITIES ON THE RECEIPT OF COURTS ORDERS, THE SCHEME OF AMALGAMATION BECAME EFFECTIVE FROM THE APPOINTED DATE, WH ICH IS CLOSE OF BUSINESS HOURS ON 31 ST MARCH, 2001 (COPY OF THE COURTS ORDER ENCLOSED). (II) CONSEQUENT TO THE SAID AMALGAMATION, THE NAME OF THE COMPANY WAS CHANGED FROM ALSTOM POWER INDIA LTD. TO ALSTOM PROJECTS INDIA LTD. B)(I) UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 72A READ WITH SEC. 2(IB) OF THE ACT, THE ACCUMULATED BUSINESS LOSSES AND UNABSORBED DEPRECIATION OF ALSTOM TRANSPORT LTD AND ALSTOM POWER BOILERS LTD. SHALL BECOME ACCUMULATED BUSINESS LOSSES AND UNABSORBED DEPRECIATION ITA. NO . 3052/M/08 C.O. NO. 181/M/08 8 OF THE COMPANY (AS THE COMPA NY IS AMALGAMATED COMPANY) RESPECTIVELY, FOR THE YEAR IN WHICH AMALGAMATION WAS EFFECTED I.E. F.Y. 2000 - 01 RELEVANT TO .Y 2001 - 02 (AS THE APPOINTED DATE OF AMALGAMATION IS 31 ST MARCH , 2001. II) AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SEC 72A OF THE ACT, ACCUMULATED BU SINESS LOSSES OF ALSTOM TRANSPORT LTD AND ALSTOM POWER BOILERS LTD (WHICH IT WOULD HAVE BEEN ENTITLED TO CARRY FORWARD AND SET OFF UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 72 OF THE ACT, AS IF THE AMALGAMATION HAD NOT TAKEN PLACE), SHALL BE SET OFF AND CARRIED FORWARD BY THE COMPANY FOR A PERIOD OF 8 ASSESSMENT YEARS COMMENCING FROM A.Y. 2002 - 03. III) FURTHER TO PARA (B)(II) ABOVE, UNABSORBED DEPRECIATION OF ALSTOM TRANSPORT LTD AND ALSTOM POWER BOILERS LTD SHALL FORM PART OF THE DEPRECIATION OF THE COMPANY FOR THE Y EAR IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 72A R.W. SEC. 32 OF THE ACT. AND AT POINT 2(C) FOLLOWING EXPLANATION WAS GIVEN C) THE DETAILS OF ACCUMULATED BUSINESS LOSSES AND UNABSORBED DEPRECIATION OF ALSTOM TRANSPORT LTD AND ALSTOM POWER BOILERS LTD ARE ANNEXED AS STATEMENTS 2 & 3 RESPECTIVELY. 10.1. ON THE BASIS OF THESE NOTES AND AFTER EXAMINING THE CLAIM IN THE LIGHT OF THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 72A(2) OF THE ACT, THE AO ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF SET OFF. 10.2. THE ANALYSIS OF THE AFOREMENTIONED FACTS CLEARLY SHOW THAT THE REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT WAS WITHOUT ANY NEW TANGIBLE MATERIAL EVIDENCE BROUGHT ON RECORD. THE HONBLE HIG H COURT OF DELHI IN THE CASE OF CIT VS ORIENT CRAFT LTD. 354 ITR 536 HAS HELD THAT THE NOTICE U/S. 148 WAS WITHOUT JURISDICTION IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY TANGIBLE MATERIAL AVAILABLE WITH THE AO TO FORM THE REQUISITE BELIEF OF ESCAPEMENT OF INCOME. THE HON BLE HIGH COURT HAS CONSIDERED THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF ACIT VS RAJESH JHAVERI STOCK BROKERS PVT. LTD. 291 ITR 500 AND ALSO THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE ITA. NO . 3052/M/08 C.O. NO. 181/M/08 9 SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS KELVINATOR OF INDIA LTD. 320 ITR 5 61. 10.3. THE FACTS OF THE CASE IN HAND CLEARLY SHOW THAT THE REOPENING WAS MADE ON THE BASIS OF THE MATERIAL WHICH WERE ALREADY CONSIDERED BY THE AO DURING THE COU R SE OF THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS ITSELF. THEREFORE, THE AO HAD NO NEW MATERIAL I N HAND TO JUSTIFY THE REOPENING. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AND THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT (SUPRA), WE QUASH THE REASSESSMENT BASED ON THE NOTICE ISSUED U/S. 148 OF THE ACT. IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, THE NOTIC E SO ISSUED IS WITHOUT JURISDICTION MAKING THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT BAD IN LAW. 11. AS WE HAVE HELD THE ASSESSMENT WITHOUT ANY JURISDICTION , WE DO NOT FIND IT NECESSARY TO DECIDE THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE ON THE MERITS OF THE CASE. 12. IN THE RESULT, THE CROSS OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED AND THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. OR DER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21 ST AUGUST, 2015 . SD/ - SD/ - ( VIJAY PAL RAO ) (N.K. BILLAIYA) /JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED : 21 ST AUGUST , 2015 . . ./ RJ , SR. PS ITA. NO . 3052/M/08 C.O. NO. 181/M/08 10 / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) - 4. / CIT 5. , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. / GUARD FILE . / BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI