PUSHPA GUPTA,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD - 46(5), NEW DELHI

The learned counsel of assessee submitted that in the present case the assessee filed her objection to initiation of re-assessment proceedings u/s. 147 of the I.T Act 1961, (for shot the Act) on 05.11.2018 which was dismissed by the AO by passing order on 30.11.2018 and the AO passed impugned reassessment order only Pushpa Gupta Page 2 of 4 u/s. 143(3)/147 of the Act on 07.12.2018 for A.Y. 2011-12 which is against the preposition rendered by Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Asian Paints 296 ITR 90 (Bom) which was also follow by various co-ordinate bench of jurisdictional including ITAT Delhi-E Bench in the case of Pioneer Town Planners Pvt. Ltd. vs DCIT, order dated 06.08.2018 in for A.Y. 2009-10.

Replying to the above, the learned Sr. DR supported this orders of the authorities below and submitted there is no bar on that the AO which refrain him from passing reassessment order immediately after dismissal of objections of assessee to the reopening. However, he could not controvert the above noted factual position as submitted by the learned counsel of assessee. 4. On careful consideration of above submissions I note that the co-ordinate Bench of ITAT Delhi in the case of Pioneer Town Planners Pvt. Ltd. (supra) in para 11 and 12 held as follows:- 11. On the issue of validity of reopening and initiation reassessment proceedings u/s. 147 of the Act the Id. AR also pointed out that as per ratio of the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Asian Paints Ltd. 296 ITR 90 (Bom), the AO to wait for four weeks to begin assessment after disposing of the objection and non-compliance of the same renders assessment proceedings void. He submitted that in the present case the objections of the assessee vide dated 29.11.2016 filed before the AO were disposed of/dismissed by the A by the order dated 12.12.2016 and he passed impugned reassessment order u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act on 22.12.2016 which is clear violation of directions given by Pushpa Gupta Page 3 of 4 Hon'ble High Court in the case of Asian Paints (supra) and onthis count also reassessment proceedings and consequent orders are void and thus, bad in law. This view was again approved by Hon'ble High Court of Bombay itself in the subsequent decision in the case of Aroni Commercials Ltd. vs. DCIT reported in 362 ITR 403 (Bom) and followed by ITAT, Bombay in the case of Shri Hirachand Kanuga vs.DCIT in & 4262/2012 dated 27.02.2015.

On these submissions, the Id. DR could not controvert the facts this that the AO disposed of objections of the assessee by way of passing order on 12.12.2016 and impugned reassessment order u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act was passed only after 10 days of disposal of objections. These facts trigger the ratio of the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Asian paints (supra), wherein their lordship directed that the AO to wait for four weeks to begin assessment after disposing of the objections of the assessee and non-compliance the same renders assessment proceedings void and bad in law. Present impugned reassessment order cannot be held sustainable and valid as the AO has passed the same immediately after 10 days of disposal of/dismissal of objection of the assessee which is clear violation of direction of Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Asian paints (supra) and legal contention of the assessee on this issue are found to be acceptable and we hold so.