Court dismisses challenge to tax assessment reopening for 2010-11 due to petitioner's delay

The court dismissed the petition challenging the re-opening of the assessment for the year 2010-11 and the subsequent order. The court emphasized the petitioner's delay in objecting to the reasons recorded for re-opening, leading to the dismissal of the petition without any order as to costs.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for re-opening Assessment Year 2010-11 and order under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 for the same year.

Analysis:
The petition challenges a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, seeking to re-open the Assessment for the year 2010-11 and an order passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 for the same year. The petitioner raised objections to the reasons recorded in support of the notice, citing legal precedents that a reassessment should not be initiated for four weeks after the disposal of objections. Despite this, the Assessing Officer passed the impugned order on 28th December, 2016, prompting the petitioner to approach the court. The court directed the Assessing Officer to explain his conduct and stay the re-opening notice and the order until further orders.

The respondent Revenue argued that a notice dated 14th October, 2016, was served upon the petitioner, which the petitioner denied receiving. The Assessing Officer provided evidence of the notice being served and the petitioner's acknowledgment. The petitioner, however, did not file a rejoinder affidavit to dispute these facts. The court noted the lack of clean hands on the petitioner's part and dismissed the petition, emphasizing that the petitioner had not contested the facts presented by the Assessing Officer.

The court further addressed the delay in the petitioner objecting to the reasons recorded for re-opening the assessment. The petitioner's objections were filed late, making it impossible to provide the petitioner with the required time before passing the Assessment Order on 28th December, 2016. Consequently, the court held that the precedents cited by the petitioner did not apply in this case, leading to the dismissal of the petition without any order as to costs.

In conclusion, the court dismissed the petition challenging the re-opening of the assessment for the year 2010-11 and the subsequent order, citing the petitioner's delay in objecting to the reasons recorded for re-opening. The court emphasized the importance of timely objections in such matters and upheld the Assessing Officer's actions in this case.

---