2017 (12) TMI 1688 - HC - Income Tax

Reopening of assessment u/s 147 - reasons for reopening not sought - challenge to the impugned re-open proceedings is on the ground that the materials which were available with the Assessing Officer while completing the scrutiny assessment under Section 143(3) is the sole basis for re-opening and for such reason, re-open cannot be made as it would amount to change of opinion - HELD THAT - From the papers filed in the typed set of papers, find that the petitioner has not sought for the reasons for re-opening of the assessment. If the petitioner had sought for the reasons, it would have been furnished by the Assessing Officer after which the petitioner can file his objections and a speaking order will have to be passed by the respondent on the objections as per the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of GKN Drive Shafts (India) Limited vs. Income Tax Officer 2002 (11) TMI 7 - SUPREME COURT There will be a direction to the petitioner to file a representation along with a copy of this order to the respondent and submit the same to the respondent requesting for furnishing reasons for re-opening and on receiving the reasons for re-opening, the petitioner is granted fifteen days time to submit his objections and the respondent on receipt of the objections shall pass a speaking order and communicate the same to the petitioner within a period of two weeks. Till such proceedings are finalized, no coercive action shall be initiated against the petitioner

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to re-opening proceedings under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 based on change of opinion.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged the re-opening proceedings under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, arguing that it amounted to a change of opinion as the materials available during the scrutiny assessment were the sole basis for re-opening. The court noted that the petitioner had not sought the reasons for re-opening the assessment. Referring to the decision in GKN Drive Shafts (India) Limited vs. Income Tax Officer, the court directed the petitioner to file a representation along with a copy of the order to the respondent, requesting the reasons for re-opening. The petitioner was granted fifteen days to submit objections, and the respondent was required to pass a speaking order within two weeks of receiving the objections.

The court emphasized that no coercive action should be initiated against the petitioner until the proceedings were finalized, provided the petitioner complied with the directive to file a representation within the stipulated time. The writ petition was disposed of with no costs, and the connected Miscellaneous Petition was closed.