Independent application of mind is mandatory in assessment; proceedings based only on wing proposals were set aside and remanded.

Assessment proceedings based only on Enforcement Wing or ISIC proposals, without independent application of mind by the Assessing Officer, cannot be sustained. The Court reiterated that the Assessing Officer, as a quasi-judicial authority, must examine the materials independently and cannot act merely on higher officers' reports or inspection proposals. It also noted that Circular No. 3 dated 18.01.2019 permits deviation from such proposals with recorded reasons. The impugned proceedings were set aside and the matters remanded for fresh consideration after giving the assessees an opportunity to file objections and be heard.

---

---

Issues: Whether assessment proceedings initiated solely on the basis of Enforcement Wing or ISIC proposals, without independent application of mind by the Assessing Authority, could be sustained.

Analysis: The petitions challenged proceedings founded on audit reports and inspection proposals forwarded by the Enforcement Wing or ISIC authorities. The Court reiterated that an Assessing Officer, being a quasi-judicial authority, must independently consider the materials and cannot act merely on the basis of higher officers' proposals. It also noted that Circular No. 3 dated 18.01.2019 empowered the Assessing Authority to deviate from such proposals and finalize the assessment independently with recorded reasons.

Conclusion: The impugned proceedings were not sustainable and were set aside, with the matters remanded to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration after giving the assessees an opportunity to file objections and be heard.

---