THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AMRITSAR. vs. M/S KHOSLA INTERNATIONAL, BATALA

ITA 307/ASR/2016Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar27 March 2019AY 2008-0912 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the reopening of assessment was invalid due to borrowed satisfaction, rendering the subsequent assessment without jurisdiction. While the Tribunal agreed that a notice under section 143(2) was not mandatory in this specific scenario, the primary reason for quashing the assessment was the invalid reopening.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order which quashed the assessment. The CIT(A) had held that the reopening of assessment was invalid due to borrowed satisfaction and that no notice under section 143(2) was issued. The assessee argued that the Assessing Officer (AO) had previously sought to drop audit objections, indicating no valid ground for reopening.

What were the issues?

Whether the reopening of assessment was based on the AO's own satisfaction or borrowed satisfaction, and whether the absence of a section 143(2) notice invalidated the assessment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 143(2),Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(20)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR

Before: SH. SANJAY ARORA & SH. N. K. CHOUDHRY

Hearing: 06.02.2019Pronounced: 28.03.2019

Per Sanjay Arora, AM: This is an Appeal by the Revenue arising out of the Order by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Amritsar ‘(CIT(A)’ for short) dated 29.02.2016, allowing the assessee’s appeal contesting its’ assessment under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’ hereinafter) dated 30.03.2014 for Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2008-09. 2. The appeal challenges the impugned order on the twin aspects on which the ld. CIT(A) has quashed the assessment, i.e., (i) that the reopening is invalid as a notice u/s. 148(1), issued on 30.03.2013, is on the basis of a borrowed satisfaction; (ii) that no notice u/s. 143(2) stands, in any case, issued.

2 Asst. CIT v. Khosla Int

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →