Reassessment objections must be decided first; failure to pass a speaking order vitiates assessment and related notices.

Where an assessee files objections to reassessment jurisdiction, the assessing authority must dispose of them by a reasoned speaking order before completing reassessment. Failure to adjudicate the objections is not a curable defect and vitiates the reassessment, because the assessee is denied the statutory opportunity to challenge the jurisdictional finding. On that basis, the reassessment order and consequential demand and penalty notices were quashed, and the matter was remanded for fresh hearing and decision on the objections and other legal pleas, including limitation and the request for relevant documents.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether reassessment proceedings and consequential assessment could be sustained without adjudicating the assessee's objections to the assumption of jurisdiction under Section 148. (ii) Whether the impugned reassessment order and consequential demand and penalty notices were liable to be quashed and the matter remanded for fresh decision on the objections and legal pleas.

Issue (i): Whether reassessment proceedings and consequential assessment could be sustained without adjudicating the assessee's objections to the assumption of jurisdiction under Section 148.

Analysis: The objections filed by the assessee were received by the revenue, but no speaking order was passed on them before completion of reassessment. The requirement to decide such objections is mandatory, and the failure to do so cannot be treated as a curable defect. Where objections are not adjudicated, the assessee is denied the opportunity to pursue the available legal remedy against an adverse finding.

Conclusion: The reassessment could not be sustained without first deciding the objections; the omission rendered the consequent action illegal.

Issue (ii): Whether the impugned reassessment order and consequential demand and penalty notices were liable to be quashed and the matter remanded for fresh decision on the objections and legal pleas.

Analysis: Since the objections were not decided, the reassessment order and consequential notices stood on an illegal foundation. The request to cure the defect by deciding objections later, or by permitting simultaneous passing of objections and fresh assessment orders, was rejected because the assessee's right to challenge the objections-based decision cannot be curtailed. Legal objections, including limitation and the request for relevant documents, remained open for adjudication by the authority in accordance with law.

Conclusion: The impugned orders and notices were quashed and the matter was remanded for fresh hearing and disposal of the objections and other legal pleas.

Final Conclusion: The proceedings were set aside to the extent necessary to require a fresh adjudication on the assessee's objections, including legal objections, before any further assessment action could be taken.

Ratio Decidendi: Where reassessment objections are filed and received, the assessing authority must dispose of them by a reasoned speaking order before completing assessment, and failure to do so vitiates the consequential assessment and related notices.

---