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>Tax Notice Quashed: Court Remands Case for Reassessment, Orders Officer to Address Objections and Provide Fair Hearing.</h1> <h3>Jaganathan Bhaarath Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Non-Corporate Circle 10 (1), Chennai</h3> The HC quashed the impugned order regarding a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for alleged escaped assessment for the Assessment Year ... Validity of reopening assessment order concluding assessee did not submit a reply to notice - As submitted petitioner was called upon to submit a reply thereto - According to the petitioner, the e-filing portal did not include a tab for the submission of an online reply. Consequently, the petitioner submitted the reply physically on 01.06.2022 and obtained an acknowledgment from the office of the ACIT - HELD THAT:- The documents on record include the reply dated 01.06.2022 of the petitioner to notice dated 23.05.2022. The said reply also bears acknowledgment dated 01.06.2022 of the relevant Income Tax Office. A subsequent reply dated 02.06.2022 is also on record and, likewise, the said reply also bears acknowledgment dated 02.06.2022 of the relevant office. In light of these documents, the conclusion to the effect that the assessee did not file a reply to notice dated 22.05.2022 is contrary to the documents on record. Therefore, the said order cannot be sustained. For reasons set out above, this writ petition is allowed by quashing impugned order dated 30.07.2022 and the notices issued pursuant thereto. As a corollary, the matter is remanded for reconsideration. Issues:The judgment involves a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for alleged escaped assessment for the Assessment Year 2013-14. The main issue revolves around the submission of replies by the petitioner to the said notice and the subsequent order based on the alleged non-submission of replies.Details of the Judgment:Issue 1: Submission of Replies to NoticeThe petitioner received a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act for escaped assessment. The petitioner physically submitted replies on 01.06.2022 and 02.06.2022, with acknowledgments from the Income Tax Office. However, the impugned order wrongly concluded that the petitioner did not file a reply to the notice dated 23.05.2022. The Court found this conclusion to be contrary to the documents on record, thus quashing the order and remanding the matter for reconsideration.Issue 2: Merits of the Initiation of ProceedingsThe respondent argued that there was a sufficient basis for initiating proceedings regarding escaped assessment. Despite this, the respondent agreed to remand the matter for the consideration of the petitioner's objections. The Court directed the Assessing Officer to proceed with the matter on merits after duly considering the objections filed by the petitioner on 01.06.2022 and 02.06.2022, providing a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner. This process was instructed to be completed within 12 weeks from the date of receipt of the order.In conclusion, the writ petition was allowed, the impugned order dated 30.07.2022 and related notices were quashed, and the matter was remanded for reconsideration on merits. The Assessing Officer was directed to consider the objections filed by the petitioner and provide a reasonable opportunity for further proceedings within a specified timeframe.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
