9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (12) TMI 1498X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... en discharged by Revenue to justify assumption of jurisdiction u/s 147 through issue of notice under section 148 of Income Tax Act. When the assumption of jurisdiction u/s 147 read with section 148 of I.T.Act lacks validityt he resultant assessment order lacks legitimacy. On this ground alone, the aforesaid assessment order dated 12.12.2008 deserves to be annulled. We further note that the Assessing Officer has not furnished reasons for issue of notice u/s 148 to the assessee in spite of order of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd [ 2002 (11) TMI 7 - SUPREME COURT] whereby the Assessing Officer is bound to provide reasons recorded by him for issue of notice u/s 148 of I.T.Act to the assessee once the assesse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cogent material, to allow the expenses on adhoc basis @ 20% of the receipt in substitution of estimate made by the AO and consequently the income enhanced to ₹ 15,57,710/- from assessed by AO ₹ 3,23,022/- is arbitrary, unjust and at any rate very excessive. 3. That disallowance of ₹ 1,55,680/- out of the various expenses had made by the AO is arbitrary, unjust and at any rate very excessive. 3. The assessee filed return of income on 10.08.2006 showing income of ₹ 1,67,342/-. The case was not selected for scrutiny by the Assessing Officer which is evident from the fact that no notice u/s 143(2) of Income Tax Act was issued by the Assessing Officer, the time limit whereof was available up to 30th September, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ee s side, which is reproduced below for ready reference :- 7. At the time of hearing before us, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee placed reliance on the aforesaid synopsis. He further submitted that the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer, if any, for his belief that income has escaped assessment has not been supplied by the Assessing Officer to the assessee. He further drew our attention to paragraph 3.2 of the impugned appellate order dated 28.03.2013 of the Ld. CIT(A) to highlight that the assessment records were not produced by the Assessing Officer even before the Ld. CIT(A) despite the requisition made by the Ld. CIT(A) vide letters dated 26.06.2013 and 01.07.2013. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee sub ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ucted by the Assessing Officer prior to issue of notice u/s 148 of Income Tax Act on 07.12.2007 ; Ld. DR further admitted that no proceedings were pending before the Assessing Officer prior to issue of notice dated 07.12.2007 u/s 148 of Income Tax Act. 9. We have heard both the sides patiently and perused the materials on record carefully. It is not in dispute that reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer for coming to the belief that income had escaped the assessment, was neither supplied by the Assessing Officer to the assessee ; nor the assessment records were produced before the Ld. CIT(A). The reasons so recorded, if any, have neither been provided to the Ld. CIT(A), nor is there any offer from Revenue s side to produce the same be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 148 of Income Tax Act. When the assumption of jurisdiction u/s 147 read with section 148 of I.T.Act lacks validity, the resultant assessment order lacks legitimacy. On this ground alone, the aforesaid assessment order dated 12.12.2008 deserves to be annulled. However, we further note that the Assessing Officer has not furnished reasons for issue of notice u/s 148 of I.T.Act to the assessee in spite of order of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. vs. ITO (2003) 259 ITR 19 whereby the Assessing Officer is bound to provide reasons recorded by him for issue of notice u/s 148 of I.T.Act to the assessee once the assessee has filed return in response to the notice issued u/s 148 of Income Tax Act. 9.1 Moreover, w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
