9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (6) TMI 181X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sed, instead of dealing with the same, by passing a speaking order, the first respondent chose to merely inform the assessee that the proceedings have been initiated only with the approval of the jurisdictional Joint Commissioner. The first respondent has not at all dealt with the contentions raised by the assessee. The Hon ble Supreme Court in GKN Driveshafts [ 2002 (11) TMI 7 - SUPREME COURT] had specifically held that the assessing officer is bound to dispose of the assessee s objections by passing a speaking order. In as much as this requirement of law as laid down by the Supreme Court has not been complied with, the respondent is directed to dispose of the petitioner s objections by passing a speaking order within a period of four week ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Joint Commissioner and hence, the reopening is in accordance with law. Thereupon, the present writ petitions came to be filed questioning the impugned notices under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act for reopening the assessment. 2.The respondent has filed a detailed counter affidavit seeking to justify the initiation of the impugned proceedings. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner reiterated all the contentions set out in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petitions. He raised a host of contentions and relied on a number of case laws. In fact, the compilation of case laws was also submitted. As regards the assessment year 2016-17, the petitioner's counsel pointed out that he had filed the returns of income on 22 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... petitioner submits that he had asked the reasons for reopening the assessment which was furnished by the first respondent and the same has been extracted in the affidavit. A mere reading of the reasons would show that there is no escapement of income as contemplated in the notice issued under Section 148. Further, the petitioner has filed a reply dated 13.06.2018 objecting to the reopening on the ground that the reasons recorded do not point any escapement of income but only for verification of certain transactions. In the reply, the petitioner has stated that regular books of accounts were maintained and it was not available in the premises when the survey took place. Further, the first respondent has not passed any order on the reply whic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... merely inform the assessee that the proceedings have been initiated only with the approval of the jurisdictional Joint Commissioner. The first respondent has not at all dealt with the contentions raised by the assessee. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in GKN Driveshafts had specifically held that the assessing officer is bound to dispose of the assessee's objections by passing a speaking order. In as much as this requirement of law as laid down by the Supreme Court has not been complied with, the respondent is directed to dispose of the petitioner's objections by passing a speaking order within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. In this view of the matter, I refrain from interfering with the impug ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
