Reassessment under Income Tax Act is impermissible on issues already addressed in a completed assessment, as it constitutes a change of opinion without new material evidence.

JUDGMENT :

V. KAMESWAR RAO, J.

1. This petition has been filed with the following prayers :

“1. Issue a writ of Certiorari or writ of mandamus or appropriate writ, direction or order

a. setting aside the impugned order u/s 148A(d) of the Act and the accompanying notice u/s 148 of the Act both date 31.03.2023 by Respondent No. 1 in the Petitioner’s case for A. Y. 2016-17.

b. Quashing the proceedings initiated vide the impugned notice dated 31.03.2023 u/s 148 of the Act.”

2. The petition relates to the Assessment Year (AY) 2016-17, for which an order under Section 148 A(d) of the Income Tax Act,1961 (‘the Act’) and a notice under of the Act, both dated 31.03.2023 were issued by the respondent no.1, on the information available with him whereby he has called for the filing of the return of income (ITR) by the petitioner herein, within thirty days.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

3. At the outset, we may provide a brief factual background of the controversy. The petitioner herein, is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and is regularly assessed to income tax at Delhi. For the AY concerned i.e. 2016-17, the petitioner filed its ITR on 08.10.2016, declaring loss of Rs. 10,24,33,542/-. The petitioner’s case was picked up for scrutiny assessment, pursuant to a notice under Section 143 (2) being issued. Thereafter, upon conducting the proceedings, the Assessing Officer passed the assessment order under (3) of the Act, on 09.12.2018, assessing the income at Rs. 14,56,05,630/-. The assessing officer by this order made an addition of Rs. 24,80,39,169/-, on account of alleged premium charged in excess of the fair market value of shares determined by changing the method of valuation of shares from DCF method adopted by the petitioner, to the book value method.

4. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the petitioner filed the first appeal before Commissioner of Income Tax [Appeals]-4, New Delhi [“CIT(A)”], on 07.01.2019. The first appellate authority partly allowed the petitioner's appeal vide order dated 20.01.2020. The addition made by the assessing officer under Section 56 (2)(viib) of the Act was deleted but some related technical grounds were dismissed. Hence, the appeal came to be partly allowed. However, aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), the Revenue filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Delhi on29.06.2020 and the same is pending orders of the ITAT.

5. On 22.03.2023, the respondent no. 1 issued a notice to the petitioner under Section 148 A(b) of the Act along with relevant annexures and scanned copy of audit objections raised by the local Audit Party conveying that he has information in his possession which suggests that income chargeable to tax for AY 2016-17 has escaped assessment within the meaning of Section 147 of the Act and called upon the petitioner to show cause as to why notice under of the Act should not be issued. Thereafter, the Assessing officer while relying upon E