9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Appeal against order upholding re-opening of assessment u/s 148 and addition u/s 68 for AY 2002-03.
The appellant challenged the order upholding the re-opening of assessment u/s 148 and confirming the addition of Rs. 4,61,500 made u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2002-03. The appellant initially raised one ground of appeal but later introduced an additional ground questioning the validity of the reassessment u/s 147. The appellant argued that the conditions for reopening under u/s 147 were not satisfied and there was no reason to believe that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment. The appellant relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. to support their case. During the hearing, the appellant's counsel contended that the additional ground challenging the reopening of assessment was inadvertently omitted from the original appeal memo. The appellant requested the admission of this ground, emphasizing that it involved a pure question of law. The appellant also highlighted that the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer for issuing the notice u/s 148 were not provided to the appellant, which was a crucial aspect in determining the validity of the reassessment u/s 147. The appellant urged that the matter be remanded to the Assessing Officer for proper consideration in light of the Supreme Court's decision in GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. The Revenue representative did not contest the submissions made by the appellant's counsel during the hearing, indicating a lack of opposition to the appellant's arguments regarding the validity of the reassessment u/s 147. After considering the contentions from both sides and reviewing the lower authorities' orders, it was observed that the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer for issuing the notice u/s 148 were not furnished to the appellant, aligning with the legal requirement outlined in previous judgments. Referring to the judgment of the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in a similar case, the Tribunal acknowledged the procedural steps to be followed when a notice u/s 148 is issued. These steps included filing a return in response to the notice, requesting and receiving the reasons for the notice, filing objections, and allowing the assessing authority to decide on the objections before proceeding with reassessment. In light of these principles, the Tribunal admitted the additional ground raised by the appellant and directed the Assessing Officer to provide the reasons recorded for issuing the notice u/s 148. The appellant was granted the opportunity to file objections, following which the Assessing Officer was instructed to pass an appropriate order and re-adjudicate the addition of Rs. 4,61,500 in accordance with the law. Separate Judgement: None mentioned.
|
