9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Challenging consolidated order by CIT (Appeals) for multiple assessment years. Validity of reassessment proceedings under section 147(a)/148 of the Act. Analysis: The judgment involves both parties being aggrieved by the consolidated order passed by the CIT (Appeals) for assessment years 1978-79, 1979-80, and 1980-81. The original assessments for these years were reopened under section 147(a) following action under section 132 of the Act at the assessee's premises. Various additions were made during reassessments, including interest, household expenses, bad debts, and unexplained investments. The assessee appealed to the CIT (Appeals), who granted some relief but retained certain additions. Subsequently, both parties appealed to the Tribunal (ITAT DELHI-D). The key issue raised by the assessee before the Tribunal was the validity of the reassessment proceedings under section 147(a)/148 of the Act. The assessee contended that the necessary conditions specified under the section were not satisfied, thus challenging the validity of the reassessment. The appeals of both parties were consolidated, and the matter was heard on multiple dates due to delays in producing assessment records by the Departmental Representative. Despite repeated adjournments and opportunities provided over a year, the Department failed to produce the records, citing unacknowledged letters to tax functionaries. The Tribunal expressed strong disapproval of the Department's failure to produce the assessment records as directed, noting the casual attitude displayed by officials in responding to the Tribunal's directions. Consequently, the Tribunal drew an adverse inference against the Department for non-compliance and held the reopening under section 147(a) to be bad in law. As a result, the reassessment orders were quashed, and the reassessment was deemed invalid. Given this finding, the Tribunal did not delve into other grounds raised in the appeals, including additional grounds. Ultimately, the assessee's appeals were allowed, while those of the revenue were dismissed.
|
