9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 1647X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se appeals are common, the appeals are clubbed, heard together and a consolidated order is being passed for the sake of convenience. 2. The common ground in all the appeals is completion of assessment without communicating the reasons to the assessee stated to be bad in law and the consequent assessments made u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 are to be quashed. In this case, the assessments were completed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 and the details of date of notice and date of filing the original return of income are furnished hereunder. A.Y. Return of Income Rs. Date of filing of return Date of Issue of Notice u/s 148 Assessed Income Rs. 2006-07 28,50,10,100 28.11.2006 28.03.2012 28,70,99,500 2007-08 10,50,92,140 25.10.2007 26.03.2012 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on of the assessee. 5. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee filed appeal before this Tribunal and raised the following grounds of appeal. 1. The order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is bad in law and on facts. 2. The learned CIT (A) is not justified in not accepting the plea that the reopening the Assessment u/s 147 by issuing a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act is not legal. 3. The learned CIT(A) is not justified in not allowing interest payable on purchase tax amounting to Rs. 9,51,160/-. 4. The learned CIT(A) is not correct in confirming the addition of Rs. 3,90,106/-, claimed as repairs by the company in respect of replacement of boiler chimney, by wrongly relying on a decision ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n 28.02.2014. The Ld.AR argued that as per the Hon'ble Supreme Court judgement in the case of M/s GKN Drive Shafts (India) Ltd. Vs. ITO [259 ITR 19], once the assessee has filed the return of income, it is the obligation of the AO to communicate the reasons on demand made by the assessee. In this case, the AO has completed the assessment without communicating the reasons, hence, the assessment order framed by the AO is bad in law and required to be quashed. Ld.AR relied on the orders of the CIT vs. Trend Electronics, Hon'ble High Court of Bombay [379 ITR 0456] and Berger Paints (India) Ltd. [139 Taxmann 200] (Cal). 7. On the other hand, Ld.DR relied on the orders of the Ld.CIT(A). 8. We have heard both the parties and perused the material ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on of jurisdiction of assessing officer u/s 147 depends upon existence of reasons followed by communication thereof to the assessee. If the notice served under section 148 is challenged, the AO cannot proceed with the assessment under section 147 unless reasons are communicated. In the instant case, the contention of the assessee is that the assessee has complied with the notice u/s 148 and the AO has not furnished the reasons recorded for issuance of notice u/s 148 despite the request made by the assessee. The Revenue could not place any evidence to controvert the argument of the Ld.AR that the reasons were not communicated. Thus the assessee's case is squarely covered by the decisions in the case of Berger Paints India Ltd. Vs. ACIT (Supr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
