M/S. SHIVA RUBBER INDUSTRIES,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, GURGAON
In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA is allowed
ITA 2212/DEL/2015[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Apr 2017AY 2002-03
Bench: Shri B.P. Jainassessment Years 2002-03 Vs. Income Tax Officer, M/S. Shiva Rubber Industries, Ward-2(2), Gurgaon. Hari Nagar, Khandsa Road, Gurgaon. Pan: Aaefs 7721G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee(S) By : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. & Shri Somil Agarwal, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Bedobani Chaudhuri, Sr.D.R. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 20/04/2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 25/04/2017 Order This Appeal Of The Assessee Arises From The Order Of Learned Cit(A)-I, Gurgaon, Vide Order Dated 11.02.2015 For The Assessment Year 2002-03. 2. The Assessee Has Raised As Many Eight Grounds Of Appeal, I.E., The Legal Grounds As Well As Grounds On Merit. “1. That Having Regard To The Facts & Circumstance Of The Case, Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Confirming The Action Of Ld. Assessing Officer In Framing Impugned Assessment Order Without Assuming Jurisdiction As Per Law & Without Serving The Mandatory Notices Under Sections 142(1), 148 & 143(2) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. That Having Regard To The Facts & Circumstance Of The Case, Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Confirming The Action Of Ld. Assessing Officer In Framing Impugned Assessment Order Without Complying The Mandatory Conditions Of Section 147 To 153 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 & Reopening Of The Case Is Bad In Law & Beyond The Jurisdiction Of The Ld. Assessing Officer. 3. That Having Regard To The Facts & Circumstance Of The Case, Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Confirming The Action Of Ld. Assessing Officer In Framing The Impugned Assessment Being Beyond Jurisdiction, Bad In Law, Illegal, Unjustified, Against The Principles Of Natural Justice & Void Ab Initio.” 2
For Respondent: Ms. Bedobani Chaudhuri
Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 151(2)
…endent mind to record his/her satisfaction and further mandatory condition is that the satisfaction recorded should be “independent” and not “borrowed” or “dictated” satisfaction. Law in this regard is now sell- settled. In Sheo Narain Jaiswal & Ors. Vs. ITO, 176 ITR 35 (Pat.), it was held: “Where the Assessing Officer does not himself exercise his jurisdiction under Section 147 but merely acts at the behest of any superior authority, it must be held that assumption of jurisdiction was bad for non satisfaction of the condition precedent.” 5. The Apex Court in the case of Anirudh Sinhji Karan Sinhji Jadeja Vs. Sta…