- (1.) This appeal under section 260A of the IT Act, 1961 (for short ''the Act'') has been filed by the assessee against the order dt. 16th Oct., 2009, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar Bench, Amritsar (in short ''the Tribunal'') in ITA No. 332/Asr/2009, relating to the asst. yr. 2000-01.
(2.) The following substantial questions of law have been claimed for determination of this Court : (i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the action initiated by respondent No. 3 in issuing the notice under section 148 of the IT Act, 1961 and the consequential passing of the orders under section 143(3) is bad in law in view of the fact that the same have been issued/taken without proper service of notice under Section 148 which is a basic condition for starting of any proceedings under any enableing provisions of the IT Act, 1961 and also the Tribunal has erred in not adjudicating upon the said issue though specifically taken as per ground No. 3 ? (ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in confirming the very issuance of notice under section 148 of the IT Act, 1961 by the authorities below, as valid without appreciating the fact and the trite law that law applicable on the date of filing of the IT return is to be seen than the subsequent events or judgments ? (iii) Whether on the facts arid in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in confirming the very issuance of notice under section 148 of the IT Act, 1961 by the authorities below, as valid without appreciating the fact and the trite law that there was no concealment or wrong claim of deduction by the appellant rather it was as per law applicable on the date of filing of the IT return ? (iv) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in confirming the very issuance of notice under section 148 of the IT Act, 1961 by the authorities below, as valid without appreciating the fact and the trite law that there was no concealment or wrong claim of deduction by the appellant rather it was as per law applicable on the date of filing of the IT return and the reopening on the basis of retrospective amendment that too beyond four years from the end of the assessment year is bad in law ? (v) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in concurring with the reason recorded by the AO ? (vi) Whether on the facts arid in the circumstances of the case, the findings of Tribunal are perverse and against the evidence on record, thus, unsustainable in law ? (vii) Whether Tribunal has misdirected itself in being influenced by irrelevant facts and applying erroneous criteria while deciding the issue for claiming deduction under section 80HHC of the IT Act, 1961 ?
(3.) The facts, in brief, necessary for adjudication as narrated in the appeal, are that the assessee is a partnership firm. It is engaged in the business of manufacturing, assembling, processing and exporting goods to various parts of the world. The assessee filed return for the assessment year in question on 31st Oct., 2000 declaring total income of Rs. 11,05,920. The income'' also included deduction of Rs. 1,18,10,594' claimed' under' section ' 80HHC' of the' Act.' The' return' was processed under section 143(1) on 28th March, 2002. However, reassessment proceedings under section 147/ 148 of the Act were initiated. The AO vide order dt. 26th Dec, 2007 computed the taxable income,-of the assessee at Rs. 1,29,16,510. The appeal carried by the assessee to the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal) [for short ''the CIT(A)''], was dismissed vide order dt. 11th May, 2009.;