AMBIKA TRANSPORT SERVICES P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 4(1)(2), MUMBAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the AO's failure to dispose of the assessee's objections before completing the assessment rendered the assessment invalid. The case was set aside, directing the AO to first dispose of the objections.
What were the facts?
The assessee challenged the reopening of assessment under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The primary contention was that the Assessing Officer (AO) failed to dispose of the objections raised by the assessee against the reopening.
What were the issues?
Whether the reopening of assessment under Section 147 is valid when the assessee's objections against it were not disposed of by the AO.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI
Ambika Transport Services P. Ltd. DCIT Cir 4(1)(2) R. No. 640, 6th Floor, Aayakar 74/90, Babu Genu Rd, Souri Bldg, Kalbadevi-02 Vs. Bhavan M.K. RD PAN No.AAACA4044R Mumbai-20 Appellant .. Respondent .. Shri Subodh L. Ratnaparkhi, AR Assessee by Revenue by .. Shri Pradeep Kumar Singh, DR .. Date of hearing 24-05-2017 Date of pronouncement .. 07-06-2017 O R D E R PER MAHAVIR SINGH, JM:
This appeal by the assessee is arising out of the order of CIT(A)-9, Mumbai, in appeal No. CIT(A)-9/Cir.4/170/15-16 dated 02-12-2016. The Assessment was framed by DCIT Circle-4(1)(2), Mumbai for the A.Y. 2011-12 vide order dated 19-03-2015 u/s 143(3) read with section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter ‘the Act’).
The first issue in this appeal of assessee is as regards to the assessment of jurisdiction for re-opening of assessment under section 147 read with section 148 of the Act. For this assessee has raised following ground No.1: -
“On the facts and in law, the Hon. CIT (A) erred in upholding the re-opening of assessment u/s 147 of the IT Act 1961, not appreciating that (i) the re-opening of assessment u/s 147 of the I. Tax Act 1961, by issue of the notice u/s 148, without there being any independent and valid reason that any income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment, made the re-opening bad-in- law and Ambika Transport Services P. Ltd. A.Y:11-12 (ii) the objections raised by the appellant against re-opening of assessment, not being decided and disposed off by the id AO, resulted in the assessment being invalid and void-ab-intio.
At the outset, the learned counsel for the assessee stated that the AO has not disposed of the objection raised by the assessee for re-opening of the assessment vide his letter dated 03-02-2015 filed on 06-02-2015. The assessee enclosed copy of letter at pages 34 and 35 of assessee’s paper book. I have gone through the order of the AO but find that the AO has not even touch the objections raised by the assessee and as mandated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of GKN Drivehafts (India) Ltd. Vs. ITO & Ors, 259 ITR (SC) that completion of assessment without disposing of objection raised by the assessee is not appropriate as per law. As requested by the learned Counsel for the assessee of setting aside the orders of the lower authorities and for direction to the AO to dispose of the objections raised for reopening of assessment, I set aside the orders of the lower authorities and directed the AO to first disposed off the objection raised vide letter dated 03-02-2015, filed on 06-02-2015. After disposing of the objections in case, the AO satisfied that reopening is as per law, he will deal with the merits of the issue also. The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 07-06-2017.
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Santa Singh vs. SuperintendentUttarakhand · 27 Oct 2026
- Azaad Builders vs. Assistant Commissioner SGSTUttarakhand · 27 Oct 2026
- Shadab Malik vs. State Of U.P. And 2 OthersAllahabad · 26 Oct 2026
- Ganesh Trimbak Saraf And Another vs. The State Of Maharashtra And AnotherBombay · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S. Vajram Infra Material Industries vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026