M.M.KUMAR,J. - (1.) THIS order shall dispose of I.T.A. Nos. 330 and 332 of 2011, which have been filed by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for brevity, 'the Act'), against the common order dated 13.6.2011 rendered by the Amritsar Bench of the Income tax Appellate Tribunal (for brevity, 'the Tribunal') dismissing the appeals preferred by the revenue and upholding the view of the CIT(A). The Tribunal has held that the there was no failure on the part of the assessee in making full and true disclosure in respect of export incentives and interest on FDR and the conditions of the first proviso to Section 147 of the Act are not satisfied for reopening the assessment after the expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year. With regard to the manufacturing activity at the Rajkot Branch office by the assessee, it has been specifically observed that it is only a change of opinion by the Assessing Officer on the same set of facts. Therefore, notice under Section 147 of the Act could not have been issued by the Assessing Officer and he has exceeded jurisdiction in passing the re-assessment orders.
(2.) FACTS of the case may first be noticed, which are being referred from ITA No. 332 of 2011. On 31.10.2001, the assessee-respondent filed its return for the Assessment Year 2001-02 declaring income of Rs 21,48,377.00 after claiming deduction of Rs 85,34,789.00 under Section 80HHC of the Act. On 24.6.2002, the assessee-respondent revised the return declaring Nil income after claiming deduction of Rs 85,34,789.00 under Section 80HHC and deduction of Rs 21,48,370.00 under Section 80IB of the Act. On 30.12.2003, the Assessing Officer passed an order under Section 143(3) of the Act, determining the income of the assessee-respondent at Rs 21,84,220.00, after allowing deduction of Rs 85,34,789.00 under Section 80HHC of the Act and no deduction under Section 80IB was allowed in view of the provisions of Section 80IB(13) read with Section 80IA(9) as well as keeping in view of the fact that the machinery of the assessee-respondent was found to have been used previously for some other purpose.
(3.) FEELING aggrieved, the assessee-respondent filed an appeal before the CIT(A), Jalandhar. On 8.7.2004, the CIT(A) allowed the appeal holding that deduction under Section 80IB of the Act is admissible to the assessee-respondent. On 11.10.2004, an order under Section 154/250(6) of the Act was passed and the income of the assessee-respondent was re-computed at Nil after allowing deduction of Rs 21,84,220.00 under Section 80IB of the Act.;