PANDURANGA CHARY ACHI,SECUNDERABAD vs. ITO, (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-1, HYDERABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 14/HYD/2022Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 March 2022AY 2012-133 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the reassessment proceedings were invalid because the AO who framed the assessment had not recorded his own reasons for believing that income had escaped assessment. This lack of jurisdiction rendered the entire reassessment invalid.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer (AO) initiated reassessment proceedings based on reasons recorded by a different AO. The case file was subsequently transferred to the AO who ultimately framed the reassessment.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the validity of the reassessment proceedings due to the AO not recording his own reasons for reopening the assessment, thereby lacking proper jurisdiction.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD BENCHES “SMC”, HYDERABAD

Before: SHRI S.S.GODARA

For Appellant: Ms. Aluri V. Sai Sudha
For Respondent: Ms. Sumitha
Hearing: 02/03/2022Pronounced: 04/03/2022

O R D E R Per S. S. Godara, J.M. This assessee’s appeal arises from the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 10, Hyderabad’s order dated 22.11.2021 in case No. ITBA/ALP/S/250/2021-22/ 1037099252(1) involving proceedings u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short, ‘the Act’]. Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

Coming to the first and foremost issue of validity of the impugned re-opening for want of the Assessing Officer’s jurisdiction, it emerges at the outset that from a perusal of the assessment findings in the Assessing Officer’s order dt.13.11.2009 (Para 2 Page 3) that it was the ITO(IT-2), Hyderabad, who had formed his reopening reasons alleging escapement of taxable income from being assessed vide notice u/s 148 dt.27.03.2019. It is an admitted fact that he himself transferred the case file to ITO (IT-1),Hyderabad, who ultimately framed the impugned re-assessment. All the clinching facts make it clear that the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction to assess the assessee herein i.e. ITO (IT-I), Hyderabad had nowhere recorded his reopening reasons to believe that the assessee’s taxable income is liable to be assessed has escaped assessment. That being the case, I find merit in assessee’s stand that the reopening reasons have not been formed by the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction in his case which renders the entire proceedings invalid. It ordered accordingly. The impugned re-opening is quashed for this precise reason alone. All other pleadings on merits are rendered infructuous.

3.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed in above terms.

Order pronounced in the Open Court on 4th March, 2022.

More judgments on Section 148

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →