9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (12) TMI 1428X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eopening of assessment were not disposed off by the AO, hence, the assessment is vitiated. Decided in favour of assessee. - Shri Vikas Awasthy, Judicial Member And Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Accountant Member For the Assessee : S/Shri Ved Jain, Aman Garg, Advocates And Ms. Uma Upadhyay, Chartered Accountant For the Department : Shri Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr. DR ORDER PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM: This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-Karnal (hereinafter referred to as 'the CIT(A) ) dated 24.01.2020, for assessment year 2011-12. The assessee has filed Cross Objections in the said appeal by Revenue. 2. The facts of the case as emanating from records are; Notice u/s. 148 of Income Tax Act, 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee filed same objections on 26.12.2018 at the fag-end, that is just four days before time barring date for completion of assessment. He further submitted that merely for the reason that the AO failed to comply with the procedure indicated by the Hon ble Supreme Court of India in the case of GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd vs. ITO (supra) would not rendered the assessment proceedings null and avoid. At the most it can be held as procedural infirmity that can be rectified. To support his contention; he placed reliance on the decision in the case of Home Finders Housing Ltd. vs. ITO 404 ITR 611 (Madras). He submitted that against the decision of Hon ble High Court, the SLP filed by the assessee was dismissed. 4. Au contraire, Shri Ved Jain a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on following decisions:- i. Ferrous Infrastructure P. Ltd. vs DCIT, 2015 (5) TMI 871 (Delhi HC); ii. KSS Petron P Ltd. vs ACIT 2016 (10) TMI 1112 (Bom HC); iii. CIT vs. M/s. Pentafour Software Employee s Welfare Foundation, 418 ITR 427 (Madras); iv. ITO (Exemption) vs ICFAI University Dehradun, 2019 (5) TMI 1389 (ITAT Del); and v. Shri S Subash Chand Nahar vs DCIT, 2023 (2) TMI 303 - ITAT CHENNAI 5. We have heard the submissions made by rival sides and have examined the orders of authorities below. We have also considered the decisions on which rival sides have placed reliance. The solitary grievance of the Department in present appeal is against findings of the CIT(A) in quashing assessment order for non disposal of assessee s objections ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee against reopening of assessment were not disposed off by the AO, hence, the assessment is vitiated. 7. The Revenue has placed reliance on the decision rendered in the case of Home Finders Housing Ltd. vs. ITO (supra), to contend that non disposal of objections are mere procedural formality and would not make reassessment order void ab initio. 7.1. The assessee has placed reliance on various decisions to contend that non disposal of assessee s objections by the AO by passing a separate, speaking order is fatal to the assessment. The Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ferrous Infrastructure P. Ltd. (supra) on the issue of non compliance of directions of Hon ble Supreme Court of India in the case of GKN Driveshafts (supra) h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iction as the law laid down by the Apex Court in GKN Driveshafts (supra) has not been followed, then there is no reason to restore the issue to the Assessing Officer to pass a further/fresh order. If this is permitted, it would give a licence to the Assessing Officer to pass orders on reopening notice, without jurisdiction (without compliance of the law in accordance with the procedure), yet the only consequence, would be that in appeal, it would be restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication after following the due procedure. This would lead to unnecessary harassment of the assessee by reviving stale/old matters. 7.3 The Hon ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Pentafour Software Employees Welfare Association (supra), ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... an order without jurisdiction. The law declared by the Hon'ble Apex Court is a binding character and is a source of law and to itself which will bind all authorities. 37. xxxxxxx 38. xxxxxxx 39.The Hon'ble Supreme Court in GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. (supra) had clarified that when a notice under Section 148 of the Act is issued, the proper course of action for the noticee is to file a return and if he so desires, to seek for reasons for issuing such notice. Further, it was held that the Assessing Officer is bound to furnish reasons within a reasonable time, on receipt of the reasons, the noticee is entitled to file objections and the Assessing Officer is bound to dispose of the same by passing a speaking order. 40.We do not agree ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
