TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Court orders respondent to provide reasons for reopening assessment within 15 days, petitioner can file objections within 30 days.</h1> <h3>T.V. Mylsamy Versus The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax</h3> T.V. Mylsamy Versus The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax - TMI Issues:Challenging notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for escaped assessment in 2002-03. Failure to furnish reasons for reopening assessment. Compliance with the mandate laid down by the Supreme Court in GKM Driveshafts (India) Ltd. case.Analysis:The petitioner challenged a notice issued by the second respondent under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for escaped assessment in the year 2002-03. The petitioner contended that despite requesting the reasons for reopening, they were not furnished by the first respondent. However, the Court noted that there was correspondence between the petitioner and the Department after the notice was issued, where the petitioner acquired some unofficial knowledge of the reasons for reopening, prompting objections. The first respondent, in response, called for the petitioner's income return and objections under Section 144 of the Act. The petitioner realized the need for reasons for reopening only after further communication, leading to a formal request for reasons on 13.11.2008.The Revenue, in defense, stated that the petitioner had already submitted returns for 2002-03, which were processed with a reply given to the petitioner. The Court emphasized the mandate set by the Supreme Court in GKM Driveshafts (India) Ltd. case, requiring the Assessing Officer to furnish reasons for reopening when requested by the assessee. The Court highlighted that the reasons for reopening must be communicated to the assessee to enable them to raise objections. Merely having partial knowledge of the reasons is not sufficient compliance with the mandate, as seen in the case of GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd.Consequently, the Court disposed of the writ petition with specific directions. The first respondent was directed to furnish reasons for reopening the assessment for 2002-03 within 15 days, after which the petitioner could file objections/reply within 30 days. The assessment was to be redone following the mandate from the GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. case. The Court clarified that neither party should take advantage of the pending petition and allowed the assessee to raise all grounds during objection submission. The judgment concluded without any costs, closing the connected Miscellaneous Petition.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
