2018 (1) TMI 1676 - HC - Income Tax

Validity of reopening of assessment u/s 147 - mandation of reasons for re opening - Tribunal setting aside the assessment on the ground of non-provision of the reasons for reopening assessment - HELD THAT - It is an undisputed position before us that the reasons for re opening were not provided to the Respondent-Assessee in spite of the same being sought by. The impugned order of the Tribunal allowed the Respondent-Assessee s appeal by following the decision of this Court in CIT v/s. Videsh Sanchanr Nigam Ltd.. 2011 (7) TMI 715 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT Revenue very fairly states that the issue raised by the Revenue stands concluded against the Revenue and in favour of the Respondent-Assessee by the decisions of this Court in Videsh Sanchar Nigam (supra) as well as in CIT v/s. Trend Electronics 2015 (9) TMI 1119 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT - No substantial question of law

Summary

Issues:
- Challenge to order of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal regarding Assessment Year 1999-2000
- Justification of setting aside assessment due to non-provision of reasons for reopening assessment

Analysis:
The High Court of Bombay heard an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, challenging the order dated 3rd November, 2014 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (the Tribunal) concerning Assessment Year 1999-2000. The main issue raised by the Revenue for consideration was whether the Tribunal was justified in setting aside the assessment due to the non-provision of reasons for reopening the assessment. It was acknowledged that the reasons for reopening were not provided to the Respondent-Assessee despite being requested. The Tribunal's decision to allow the Respondent-Assessee's appeal was based on a precedent set by the Court in CIT v/s. Videsh Sanchanr Nigam Ltd., 340 ITGR 66.

The Counsel representing the Revenue conceded that the issue raised by the Revenue had already been decided against them and in favor of the Respondent-Assessee in previous judgments of the Court, specifically referencing Videsh Sanchar Nigam and CIT v/s. Trend Electronics. Consequently, the Court determined that the proposed question did not present any substantial question of law and, therefore, was not entertained. As a result, the Court dismissed the Appeal without any order as to costs.