Itta/372/2014 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-I v. M/S Andhra Bank
High Court
07 Nov 2017 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · taphc
Parties
Itta/372/2014 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-I v. M/S Andhra Bank
Date of order
07 Nov 2017
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Itta/372/2014 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-I v. M/S Andhra Bank, the High Court (2017) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: 95/Hyd/2010, this Appeal is also dismissed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM
ITTA NO. 372 OF 2014
DATE: 7[th ]NOVEMBER 2017
Between: The Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Hyderabad.
… Appellant
AND M/s Andhra Bank, Hyderabad
… Respondent Counsel for the Appellant : Sri J.V. Prasad, Senior Standing Counsel for IT Department Counsel for the respondent :
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
J U D G M E N T:(per Hon’ble Sri Justice C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy)
Common order dated 04.10.2013 to the extent it pertains to I.T.A. No. 1945/Hyd/2011 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench “A”, Hyderabad is the subject matter of this Appeal.
Mr. J.V. Prasad, learned Senior Standing Counsel for Income Tax Department fairly placed before us the copy of the order dated 08.08.2014 in I.T.T.A. No. 555 of 2014 arising out of the order dated 04.04.2013 in I.T.A. No. 95/Hyd/2010 pertaining to respondent assessee itself. By the said order, a Division Bench of this Court has dismissed the said I.T.T.A. confirming the order of the Tribunal, the operative portion of which reads as under:
“ It appears that the learned Tribunal found that the Assessing Officer wanted to reopen the assessment on the basis of mere change of opinion. It is legally well settled that mere change in the opinion does not enable the Assessing Officer to reopen any assessment beyond four years. For that matter, the CBDT circular cannot take place of the law.
We therefore, do not find any relevance of the CBDT circular, as quoted in the suggested question of law, to the present case.”
A perusal of the order under Appeal shows that the Tribunal has referred to and relied upon the order dated 04.04.2013 in I.T.A.No. 95/Hyd/2010. As this Court has
already dismissed I.T.T.A. No. 555 of 2014, confirming the order in I.T.A. No. 95/Hyd/2010, this Appeal is also dismissed. No costs.
___________________________
C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J
__________________________ CHALLA KODANDA RAM, J
07[th] November 2017 ksld
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.