9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (3) TMI 179X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ome Tax Act, 1961(the "Act") seeking to reopen the Assessment for Assessment Year 2007-2008; and (b) The draft Assessment order dated 30th March, 2015 consequent to the reopening notice dated 6th February 2013 for the Assessment year 2007-2008. 3. For the Assessment year 2007-2008, the Petitioner had filed a return of income declaring total income of Rs. 12.77 Crores. The same was accepted by issuing intimation under Section 143(1) of the Act. 4. Thereafter, on 6th February, 2013 the impugned notice was issued seeking to reopen the Assessment for Assessment Year 2007-2008. On 15th March, 2013 itself, the Petitioner filed its revised return of income and sought reasons recorded in support of the impugned notice. The Respondents did not fu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . In the present case, as the issue involves the provisions with regard to transfer pricing cases, the period of limitation to dispose of an Assessment consequent to reopening notice as provided in 4th proviso to sub-section(2) of Section 153 of the Act is two years from the end of the financial year in which the reopening notice was served. In this case, the impugned reopening notice was issued on 6th February, 2013 and the reasons in support were supplied only on 19th March, 2015. This when the Revenue was aware at all times that the period to pass an order of reassessment on the impugned reopening notice dated 6th February 2013 would expire on 31st March, 2015. However, there is no reason forthcoming on the part of the Revenue to satisfa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ime. At that stage, we indicated that in view of the gross facts of this case, the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax would take serious note of the above and after examining the facts, if necessary, take appropriate remedial action to ensure that an assessee is not made to suffer for no fault on its part. This is particularly so as almost the entire period of two years from the end of the financial year in which the notice is issued was consumed by the Assessing Officer in failing to give reasons recorded in support of the impugned notice. Nevertheless, the Assessing Officer proceeds to pass a draft Assessment order without dealing with the objections filed by the Petitioner. We could have on that date or even earlier passed an order set ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the same on 25th March, 2015. This passing of the draft Assessment order without having disposed of the objections is in defiance of the Supreme Court's decision in GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd (supra). Thus, the draft Assessment order dated 30th March, 2015 is not sustainable being without jurisdiction. This for the reason that it has been passed without disposing of the objections filed by the Petitioner to the reasons recorded in support of their impugned notice. Accordingly, we set aside the draft Assessment order dated 30th March, 2015. We are not dealing the validity of the reasons in support of the impugned notice in the present facts as the time limit to pass the Assessment order as provided under 4th Proviso to sub-section(2) o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
