9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (5) TMI 707X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... epartment, whereby the return of income filed by the Petitioner and the request for the reasons for reopening assessment were not seen by the Assessment Officer - Whether the order suffer from an error apparent on the face of the record, the error being that the same are passed contrary to the binding precedent in Ashish Agarwal [ 2022 (5) TMI 240 - SUPREME COURT] and G.K.N. Driveshafts [ 2002 (11) TMI 7 - SUPREME COURT] ? - HELD THAT:- As considering the judgment of the Supreme Court in Ashish Agarwal (supra), what has been clearly laid down therein is the procedure to be followed by the Revenue for assessment years prior to the amendment of the Act, if a notice under Section 148 is issued on or after 01.04.2021, the same shall be treated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... shafts (supra) does not lay down the proposition that the passing of an assessment order which is, as in this case on the bona fide mistake due to a system glitch of not realising that the Return had been in fact uploaded along with a request for reasons, results in the entire proceeding under Section 148 being rendered illegal and a non-est. In the facts of the present case, G.K.N. Driveshafts (supra) would not apply and a view was taken in this Court s order dated 04.11.2022 based upon the statement in the affidavit in reply. We therefore opine that on the first question, the common order in question is not open to review, as there is no error apparent on the face of the record on the ground of non-consideration of a binding precedent. Wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ioner in all four writ petitions. 2) The primary grounds for seeking review of the common Order dated 04.11.2022, as raised in the petitions and submitted by learned Senior Advocate Dr. Vineet Kothari for the Petitioner are as under:- a) That, by the order sought to be reviewed, this Court has correctly set aside the four assessment orders dated 03.03.2022 passed under Section 144 r/w Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1969 (the Act), but however, there is an error apparent on the face of the record committed by this Court which thereafter took a course to remand all four matters back to the jurisdictional assessing officer for passing assessment orders afresh in accordance with law; This submission was based on the contention that the dire ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e portal of the department, whereby the return of income filed by the Petitioner and the request for the reasons for reopening assessment were not seen by the Assessment Officer, who proceeded to pass the four assessment orders on the assumption that no reply was forthcoming. He submits that the law laid down in G.K.N. Driveshafts (supra) and Ashish Agarwal (supra) would not be attracted to the facts of this case. He further submits that the grounds of review amount to a hearing of the matter on its merits, which is impermissible, there being no error apparent in the orders sought to be reviewed. 4) Before we proceed to weigh the rival submissions on whether these Review Petitions should be allowed, some background facts are required to be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssumption that no reply was forthcoming. 4.3) Against the reassessment orders dated 03.03.2022 passed under Section 144 r/w Section 147 of the Act, the assessee filed appeals under the Act before the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC), Delhi on 26.03.2022 under Section 246A of the Act in which it sought a stay of the demand notice under Section 220(3) on 01.04.2022. An application dated 04.04.2022 was also filed before the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax requesting for stay of the demand. Yet another application was filed on 06.04.2022 before the CIT (Appeals) requesting stay of the demand notice. 4.4) Thereafter, these four writ petitions were filed seeking quashing of the orders of assessment dated 03.03.2022 in addition to w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... amended Act was sent to the assessee prior to 01.04.2021, i.e. in the present case sent on 31.03.2021 and the Return filed and application seeking reasons for reopening was requested after 01.04.2021. Thus, in our opinion, in the facts of this case, the law laid down in Ashish Agarwal (supra) would not apply and come to the aid of the Petitioner in seeking review of the order. 7) G.K.N. Driveshafts (supra) laid down that, when a notice under Section 148 of the Act is issued, the assessee is required to file a Return, and if he so desires, seeks reasons for issuing the notice. It further holds that, if the assessee takes this course, the AO is bound to furnish reasons within a reasonable time and on receipt of the reasons, the assessee is en ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
