Itxa/1112/2012 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 8 v. M/S. Hotel Corporation Of India Ltd

k IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1112 OF 2012 The Commissioner of Income Tax-8 ...Appellant.V/s.M/s. Hotel Corporation of India Ltd. ...Respondent. Mr. Tejveer Singh for the Appellant.Mr. Ashok J. Patil for the Respondent. CORAM:S.C. DHARMADHIKARI ANDA.A. SAYED, JJ. DATED : 5 NOVEMBER, 2014. P.C.: 1This Appeal by the Revenue challenges the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai Bench in Income Tax Appeal No.7246/Mum of 2008. The Assessment Year is 2003-2004. 2The Tribunal's order dated 28[th] March, 2012 records that the reopening of the assessment by the Assessing Officer is wholly vitiated. The Assessing Officer had made an order called the original assessment order. The Assessee made an additional claim of Rs.27,92,693/- in the revised return of income whereas the original claim on the renovation expenditure was Rs.76.23 lacs. The Assessing Officer completed the original assessment on the basis of this return of income. He did not complete it on the basis of the revised return of income. On that footing it was alleged that the Revenue loss is katkam k enormous and as noted by the Tribunal in the argument of the Departmental Representative. 3However, on closure scrutiny of the records, the Tribunal found that the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer on the point of incorrect computation of capital gain does not demonstrate as to how the income assessable to tax has escaped assessment. In fact no error was pointed out and a apparent one in the computation of the capital gain which could be said to be contrary to law. The reasons in fact go to disclose that Assessee offered an explanation and still the notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was issued. The Assessing Officer in the meanwhile had accepted the explanation of the Assessee and did not proceed. In such circumstances, we find that the Tribunal's reasoning from paras 10 to 13 is not vitiated by perversity or any error of law apparent on the face of the record. In such circumstances, the Tribunal was justified in allowing Assessee's Appeal. The present Appeal does not raise any substantial question of law. It is accordingly dismissed. (A.A. SAYED, J.) (S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, J.)