2024 (9) TMI 218 - HC - Income Tax

Validity of reopening assessment - non dealing with the objections filed by the petitioner relying upon letter filed by the petitioner in response to the notice issued u/s 133 (6) - HELD THAT - Though the petitioner has requested the respondent to provide information on basis of which impugned notice under section 148 of the Act is issued, however, same is never supplied and therefore, the petitioner raised objections on the basis of information available from record only. Considering the above undisputed facts, without entering into the merits of the matter, the impugned order disposing the objections of the petitioner is hereby quashed and set aside and the matter is remanded back to the AO to give an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner so as to consider the objections filed by the petitioner in detail in response to the impugned notice u/s 148. AO is also directed to provide information in his possession which is referred to and relied upon in the reasons recorded for issuance of the impugned notice u/s 148 of the Act and the petitioner shall be at liberty to file further reply if required on basis of such information.

Summary

Issues:
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking writ of certiorari and mandamus to quash notice and order, failure to consider objections by Assessing Officer, request for information to respond to notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Analysis:
The petitioner, a partnership firm being assessed for income tax, filed returns for Assessment Year 2012-2013, declaring total income and underwent scrutiny assessment. Subsequently, the petitioner received notices under section 133 (6) and 148 of the Income Tax Act regarding income received from different entities. The petitioner responded to these notices, providing details of income offered for tax. However, the Assessing Officer issued a notice under section 148 for escaped assessment without adequately considering the objections raised by the petitioner. The petitioner requested information to respond effectively to the notice, but the details were not provided by the respondent.

In the judgment, the Court noted that the Assessing Officer failed to address the objections raised by the petitioner adequately, as required by law. The Court referenced a previous case to emphasize the importance of the Assessing Officer considering objections and passing a meaningful order reflecting an application of mind. The Court found that the Assessing Officer did not deal with the objections solely based on the petitioner's earlier reply letter, indicating a lack of proper consideration.

As a result, the Court quashed and set aside the order disposing of the objections and remanded the matter back to the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer was directed to provide the information relied upon for issuing the notice under section 148 and allow the petitioner to file a further reply if necessary. The Court emphasized that it did not delve into the merits of the case and instructed the Assessing Officer to dispose of the objections in accordance with the law within a specified timeline.

In conclusion, the petition was disposed of, notice discharged, and any interim relief vacated. The judgment highlighted the importance of proper consideration of objections by the Assessing Officer and the requirement to provide necessary information to enable a meaningful response from the taxpayer.