9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 228X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 017 and despatched the same to the petitioner. Therefore, from the above details given by the respondent, it is clear that the respondent had given sufficient opportunities to the petitioner. However, the petitioner had failed to utilize those opportunities and produce the documents before the respondent. Therefore, the contention that the petitioner was not given due opportunity, cannot be accepted. On the other ground that furnishing the reasons for reopening the assessment is concerned, though the petitioner has sought for the reasons for reopening the assessment on 12.12.2017, the Assessing Officer has not furnished the reasons recorded for reopening the assessment to the petitioner. In fact, the petitioner had stated that her letter requesting the reasons recorded for reopening the assessment itself was refused, therefore, the petitioner sent the letter by Speed Post and E-mail to the respondent. Inspite of the same, the respondent had not furnished the reasons recorded for reopening the assessment to the petitioner. The respondent is directed to consider the request of the petitioner for furnishing the reasons recorded for reopening the assessment for the year 2013-14 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ioner informed the respondent her inability to appear on 10.11.2017 enclosing a Medical Certificate that she was suffering from Ostereo Arthritis and undergoing treatment. 2.2.On 20.11.2017, the respondent issued the summons under Section 131/137 of the Income Tax Act to appear on 23.11.2017 along with the documents. On 23.11.2017, the respondent also issued a show cause Notice under Section 271(1)(b) calling upon the petitioner to explain why penalty should not be levied for the failure on her part to appear before the respondent. The respondent issued another hearing Notice on 01.12.2017 fixing the case on 05.12.2017 requiring further details. The petitioner's authorized representative, by his letter dated 05.12.2017, requested the respondent to grant time, for submission of the documents, till 11.12.2017. On 05.12.2017, the respondent had issued a Notice of hearing on 08.12.2017. On 08.12.2017, the petitioner requested the respondent to provide copies of the documents filed by her erstwhile Auditor and the Notices sent by the respondent. On 12.12.2017, the petitioner approached the respondent with a letter dated 12.12.2017 requesting the reasons recorded for reopening the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ort of his contentions, the learned counsel relied upon an unreported judgment dated 29.01.2018 made in W.P.No.27598 of 2008 [T.V.Mylsamy Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-II, 63, Race Course Road, Coimbatore 18 and another] wherein this Court held as follows: ... 7.The mandate, as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of GKM Drivershafts (India) Ltd. Vs. ITO [reported in (2003) 259 ITR 19] requires that when an assessee seeks reasons for reopening the assessment, the Assessing Officer is bound to furnish the same. On receipt of the reasons, the assessee is entitled to submit their objections, which should be considered and a speaking order should be passed. The reasons cannot be inferred from the reply given by the Assessing Officer dated 12.8.2008. The reasons for reopening should find a place in the files of the Assessing Officer for the relevant Assessment Year and those reasons need to be communicated to the assessee so as to enable them to file their objections to the reopening proceedings. Therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the reply sent by the Assessing Officer on 12.8.2008 is of little avail. Even assu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er with respect to the Annual Information Return received from the Bank and Sub Registrar's Office. The petitioner was asked to provide the details viz., brief note on business, computation of income for the Assessment Year 2013-14 as well as the prior and subsequent Assessment Year, copies of books of accounts and bank statement, copy of the Sale Deed, copy of the document of the agricultural land from which the agricultural income was shown along with Patta, Chitta and Adangal. The information regarding immovable properties was also sought from the Sub Registrar's Office. 7.2.The petitioner was given opportunities to produce the records on 14.06.2017, 07.07.2017 and 06.09.2017. However, there was no response from the petitioner. Thereafter, on 29.09.2017, another authorized representative sought time till 10.10.2017 stating that the documents were in Telugu language and nothing can be inferred and the documents need to be translated. However, there was no response on 10.10.2017 and the case was reposted on 03.11.2017, vide letter dated 25.10.2017. The authorized representative, by letter dated 02.11.2017, enclosed a copy of the return of income for the Assessment Year ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the judgment reported in (2003) 259 ITR 19 [GKM Drivershafts (India) Ltd. Vs. ITO] held that the Assessing Officer is bound to furnish the reasons for reopening the assessment to the assessee when the asssessee seeks reasons for the reopening. 9.In the case on hand, though the petitioner has sought for the reasons for reopening the assessment on 12.12.2017, the Assessing Officer has not furnished the reasons recorded for reopening the assessment to the petitioner. In fact, the petitioner had stated that her letter requesting the reasons recorded for reopening the assessment itself was refused, therefore, the petitioner sent the letter by Speed Post and E-mail to the respondent. Inspite of the same, the respondent had not furnished the reasons recorded for reopening the assessment to the petitioner. 10.Therefore, on this ground, following the dictum laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the judgment reported in (2003) 259 ITR 19 [GKM Drivershafts (India) Ltd. Vs. ITO] and the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.27598 of 2008 dated 29.01.2018, the impugned assessment order dated 19.12.2017 is liable to be set aside. Accordin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
