SMT SAROJINI KESHRI,BURDWAN vs. I.T.O, WARD-3(1), ASANSOL, BURDWAN

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2236/KOL/2013Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 February 2016AY 2003-042 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the AO failed to adjudicate the assessee's objections to the reopening of assessment, as required by the Supreme Court decision in GKN Driveshaft (India) Ltd. Therefore, the lower authorities' orders were set aside.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer (AO) reopened the assessment of the assessee under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee raised objections to the reopening before the AO, but these were not adjudicated.

What were the issues?

Whether the AO properly adjudicated the assessee's objections before reopening the assessment under Section 147/148.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)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, “SMC” BENCH: KOLKATA

Before: Shri Mahavir Singh, JM]

Hearing: 23.02.2016Pronounced: 23.02.2016

For the Appellant: Shri V. N. Purohit, FCA For the Respondent: Md. Gayas Uddin, JCIT, Sr. DR ORDER This appeal by assessee is arising out of order of CIT(A), Asansol vide Appeal No. 79/CIT(A)/Asl/W-3(1)/Asl/08-09 dated 15.05.2013. Assessment was framed by ITO, Ward- 3(1), Asansol u/s. 147/143(3)/250/254 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for Assessment Year 2003-04 vide his order dated 26.11.2008.

2.

The first issue in this appeal of assessee is against the order of CIT(A) confirming the action of AO in assuming jurisdiction u/s. 147 read with section 148 of the Act for reopening of assessment despite the fact that the assessee has raised objection before AO after receiving reasons recorded but those were not adjudicated in term of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of GKN Driveshaft (India) Ltd. Vs. ITO [2003] 259 ITR 19 (SC), wherein Hon’ble court has observed as under: “when a notice under section 148 is issued, the proper course of action for the notice is to file a return and if he so desires, to seek reasons for issuing notice. The Assessing Officer is bound to furnish reasons within a reasonable time. On receipt of reasons, the noticee is entitled to file objection to issuance of notice and the Assessing Officer is bound to dispose of the same by passing a speaking order.”

Ld. Counsel for the assessee drew my attention to letter dated 09.06.2008 written to the ITO, Wd-3(1), Asansol wherein objections to the gist of reasons supplied for issuance of notice u/s. 148 of the Act was raised but these objections were not met with by the AO. Ld. Counsel for the assessee referred to page 25 of assessee’s paper book, wherein these reasons are enclosed.

3.

I have gone through the assessment order as well as the order of CIT(A) and find that none of the authorities below have adjudicated the objections raised by the assessee before the AO vide letter dated 09.06.2008. In term of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of GKN Driveshafts (India) ltd., supra the orders of the lower authorities are set aside and matter

Sarojioni Keshri, AY 2003-04 is remanded back to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication. The AO will decide the objections of the assessee first and then proceed to frame de novo assessment if the objections are held to be valid. The appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 7. In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →