2014 (11) TMI 1004 - AT - Income Tax

Reopening of assessment - objection of the assessee filed against notice u/s 148 - Held that - In the instant case, it is not in dispute that the assessee filed his objections against the issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act vide his letter dated 11.11.2009 which was received by the office of the Assessing Officer on 16.11.2009. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer passed the impugned re-assessment order on 20.11.2009, disposing off the objections to re-assessment proceedings of the assessee in the order itself. Thus, these facts show that the objections raised by the assessee against the issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act were not disposed off by the Assessing Officer by passing a speaking order thereon and allowing reasonable time to the assessee after communicating the fate of the objections before proceeding with the reassessment. Respectfully following the decision of General Motors India P. Ltd v. DCIT 2012 (8) TMI 714 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT we are of the considered view that the impugned order of re-assessment passed by the Assessing Officer without disposing off the objections raised by the assessee against the issuance of notice u/s 148 by a separate order is liable to be quashed. We order accordingly. - Decided in favour of assessee

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) order dated 23.02.2011 - Reassessment order validity challenged - Disposal of objections against notice u/s 148 of the Act - Jurisdiction of Assessing Officer - Validity of additions made - Levy of interest u/s. 234A and u/s.234B.

Analysis:
The appeal was filed against the order of the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) dated 23.02.2011. The primary issue raised was the validity of the reassessment order dated 20.11.2009. The assessee contended that the order deserved to be quashed as it was not in accordance with the law. The objections against the notice u/s 148 of the Act were not disposed of separately, leading to the challenge of the reassessment order's validity. The Assessing Officer made additions totaling significant amounts, which were contested by the assessee. Additionally, the levy of interest u/s. 234A and u/s.234B was disputed.

The assessee argued that the objections to the notice u/s 148 were raised before the Assessing Officer, but the objections were not disposed of separately. The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court's decision in a similar case emphasized the importance of the Assessing Officer deciding the objections before passing the reassessment order. Failure to do so rendered the reassessment order liable to be quashed. The Tribunal found that the objections were not adequately addressed before passing the impugned re-assessment order, leading to a violation of procedural requirements.

Citing the Gujarat High Court's ruling, the Tribunal concluded that the Assessing Officer's failure to dispose of the objections separately rendered the reassessment order invalid. As a result, the reassessment order dated 20.11.2009 was quashed. Consequently, the other grounds of appeal related to the additions made and the levy of interest became irrelevant and were dismissed. The appeal of the assessee was allowed based on the invalidity of the reassessment order.

In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the assessee's appeal, quashing the reassessment order due to the Assessing Officer's failure to address objections separately before passing the order. This decision rendered the other grounds of appeal moot, leading to their dismissal. The judgment highlighted the importance of procedural compliance in reassessment proceedings to ensure the validity of orders issued by tax authorities.