VODAFONE WEST LTD. Vs. ASSTT. CIT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGE is made in this petition preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to the notice of reopening issued under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), seeking to reopen the assessment of the petitioner for the assessment year 2007 -2008.

(2.) BRIEF facts necessary for appreciating the issue involved in this petition are as under:

(3.) LEARNED Senior counsel Mr. Saurabh Soparkar, appearing with learned counsel Mr. Bandish Soparkar for the petitioner -company, has urged that it is a well settled law that if the assessing officer has not acted independently nor had a reason to believe that any income had escaped assessment and instead, had acted on the basis of the audit objection exclusively, such notice for reopening cannot be allowed to be proceeded with. He further urged that the grounds on which notice under section 148 of the Act has been issued, were scrutinized by the assessing officer on petitioner having furnished the materials and after scrutinizing assessment under section 143(3) of the Act and therefore also, this is nothing but a change of opinion on the part of the assessing officer. He relied on the decision of the Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd. v. ITO ( : 1961) 41 ITR 191 (SC) and urged that the assessee is under no obligation to assist the assessing officer in drawing legal inferences. Cumulatively, it was argued that this is nothing but a change of the opinion on the part of the assessing officer.