9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (7) TMI 70X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ied with. Thus, the consideration of objections and the findings for reopening are of vital and in the absence of any reasons, one cannot form an opinion that reopening of assessment is done with reference to the conditions stipulated in the proviso class to Section 147 of the Act. Conditions under the provisions are mandatory. In order to establish the compliance of conditions, the authority competent must provide reasons stating that the conditions stipulated in the proviso class has been complied with. A non-speaking order in this regard cannot be sustained and therefore, the impugned order is to be construed as lacking, on application of mind and the objections raised by the petitioner are not considered, nor a finding is given. Cont ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ioner. By completing the scrutiny, the Assessing Officer passed the order of final assessment on 15.03.2013 considering the book of accounts, details and the informations as well as documents furnished by the petitioner/assessee. After a lapse of four years, but within a period of six years, a reopening proceedings was initiated under Section 148 of the Act by the 1st respondent. Notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued on 25.01.2016 and the petitioner responded to the notice on 03.02.2016. Before following the procedures contemplated by furnishing reasons for reopening, the 1st respondent issued a notice under Section 143 (2) of the Act on 04.02.2016 which was also challenged by the writ petitioner in W.P.No.39546 of 2016. However, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... those objections are considered while disposing of the objections by the 1st respondent. 5.The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents though made an attempt, could not able to defend the specific ground raised by the petitioner. However, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents merely referred the impugned proceedings dated 12.09.2016 by stating that the case was reopened after recording valid reasons wherein the assessee failed to disclose fully and truly all the material facts necessary to its assessment and based on which the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that the income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment with the prior approval of the P.CIT-3, Chennai. 6.This Court is of the consid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , the petitioner/assessee had submitted his detailed objections on 13.06.2016. The said objections reveal that with reference to the reasons furnished for reopening in proceeding dated 29.04.2016, the petitioner submitted clear and categorical reply which reads as under: Based on the perusal of the reasons recorded by you goodself for reopening the assessment, we submit most humbly that the proceedings were initiated on the very same material which was available while completing the assessment under Section 143 (3) of the Act. We plead that the reasons recorded suggest application of mind to the same set of facts, which were available at the time of assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act and hence is a mere change of opinion. A com ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd relevant Annexure is attached to this letter as 'Annexure 5'. 3. Non-deduction of tax at source on service charges paid to Ford India Private Limited Vide submission dated 14 March 2013, a detailed submission against the query raised by the AO was submitted, along with the copy of the agreements. All material facts were fully disclosed during the course of original assessment proceedings. We submit that the observation qualifies as change of opinion. A copy of the submission and relevant Annexure is attached to this letter as 'Annexure 6'. 4. Non-deduction of tax at source on advertisement charges paid through Mahindr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the objections. 9.Perusal of the order impugned dated 12.09.2016 in disposing of the objections filed by the petitioner reveals that none of the objections raised by the petitioner was considered nor any findings are made available and therefore, the provisions of the Act has not been met with and consequently, the order impugned is to be construed as non-speaking and lack of application of mind on the part of the respondents. 10.The authority competent under the statute is expected to furnish reasons for every decision taken. Two components are of paramount importance. Adherence of the procedures contemplated, firstly and furnishing reasons for arriving a particular decision, thereafter. Thus, on initiation of reopening proceedings ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
