9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (4) TMI 348X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n filed or not by the assessee. Had such an exercise been attempted, the return filed would have been noticed and application of mind would have been based on cogent facts. In the facts as they stand, the formation of belief that income has escaped assessment is plainly a mechanical exercise looking of non-application of mind. Once the return filed in due course itself remains ignored, the mechanical exercise of power becomes the inescapable conclusion. Thus, the position of law as considered by the Co-ordinate Bench in the case of Monika Rani [ 2020 (9) TMI 271 - ITAT CHANDIGARH] comes into play. Thus the appeal filed by the assessee succeeds on the jurisdiction ground itself. The impugned order is set aside and the assessment order ac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... accepted by the Chandigarh Bench of the ITAT in the case of Monika Rani Vs ITO ITO No. 582/CHD/2019 placed at Paper Book page 1 to 11, the appeal of the assessee deserves to be allowed on this ground itself . Referring to the principle followed by the Co-ordinate Bench in the aforesaid decision, it was submitted that decisions of Gujrat High Court and various other orders of the Chandigarh, Mumbai and Jaipur Benches etc. of the Tribunal had been relied upon and were referred to. Specific attention was invited to paras 10.1 to 10.6 of the aforesaid order. 3. The ld. Sr.DR on the other hand referring to para 3.2 submitted that the ld. Commissioner has addressed this ground of the assessee and taken note of the fact that no objection was r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s been issued as per the procedure laid down and there is nothing on record to show that it remained unserved. No objection was raised during assessment proceedings by the appellant. Hence, the proceedings are perfectly legal and the appeal on this issue is rejected. 6. In the said background, addressing the argument advanced by the parties, it is seen that while recording the reasons, the AO has given the following specific reason: However, as per the record of this office, the assessee has not filed his return of income. (emphasis supplied) 7. Considering the fact that the re-opening was done in the facts of the present case recording that no return was filed, it is seen that the reason recorded run foul of para 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ITO (supra) comes into play. In simi lar facts and circumstances, the Co-ordinate Bench was pleased to hold as under: 10.1 From the aforesaid reasons it is clear that the A.O. issued the notice under section 148 of the Act, for the reasons that the assessee had not filed her return of income and that the assessee had purchased a property amounting to ₹ 1,49,02,500/- during the F.Y. 2009-]0. However, the said reasons given by the A.O. for reopening the assessment are not correct since the assessee had filed the return of income on 30/03/2011, copy of which is placed at page no. 1 of the assessee's compilation. The assessee had also shown the investment in agricultural land amounting to ₹ 52,20,000/- in her Balance She ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ity decided the appeal for the assessment year 1992-93 on January, J996, and the reason had been recorded thereafter on August 18, 1997. The notice of reassessment was not valid and was liable to be quashed. ' 10.3 A similar view has been taken by the ITAT, Chandigarh 'SMC Bench in the case of Baba Kartar Singh Dukki Educational Trust Vs. ITO (supra) wherein it has been held as under: HEAD NOTE: Where Assessing Officer processed under section 143(1 j returns of income filed by assessee for assessment years 2001-02 to 2003-04 and subsequently he reopened said assessments on sole basis that assessee had not filed returns for years preceding to assessment year 2004-05 and, therefore, its income having escaped asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... formation of belief is based on these two factual aspects that the assessee has made bogus purchases which are not verifiable as assessee has not filed the return of income. The reasons for nonverifiable of the purchases made by the assessee due to non filing of the return of income as stated by the AO is absolutely incorrect and wrong and contrary to the record when the assessee has filed the return of income electronically on 29.10.2007. This fact was also subsequently accepted by the AO that the assessee filed the return of income under section 139(1). The second aspect of the reasons that the assessee has made bogus purchases is also not based on any enquiry or verification of record by the AO but this is simply reproduction of in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
