Reassessment under Section 147 set aside for lack of disposal of objections; case sent back for fresh hearing and verification

The ITAT Mumbai held that reassessment proceedings under section 147 were initiated based on information about unexplained cash deposits linked to a shell entity. The tribunal found no record of the assessee's objections to the reasons for reopening being disposed of before finalizing the assessment. Since the assessment order did not address the objections, the ITAT directed the matter to be restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on the additional grounds after verifying the assessment records and providing the assessee an opportunity of hearing. The appeal was partly allowed, emphasizing adherence to procedural fairness as per the Supreme Court's ruling in GKN Driveshaft.

---

---

ISSUES:

Whether the reassessment proceedings initiated under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are valid in the absence of disposal of objections raised by the assessee against the reasons recorded for reopening.Whether the Assessing Officer complied with the procedural requirements laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in GKN Driveshaft (India) Ltd. vs. ITO before issuing notice under section 148 of the Act.Whether additional grounds challenging jurisdiction and validity of reassessment proceedings can be admitted at the appellate stage.Whether the matter should be remanded for fresh adjudication after verification of assessment records and opportunity of hearing.

RULINGS / HOLDINGS:

The reassessment proceedings initiated under section 147 of the Act are "bad in law and without jurisdiction" because the Assessing Officer failed to pass any order disposing off the objections raised by the assessee against the reasons recorded to issue the notice under section 148, thereby not complying with the procedure prescribed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in GKN Driveshaft (India) Ltd. (supra).The notice dated 28.03.2018 issued under section 148 and the subsequent assessment order passed under section 143(3) read with section 147 of the Act are without jurisdiction and liable to be quashed unless the procedural defects are cured.The additional grounds challenging the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer to initiate reassessment proceedings are "purely legal in question and goes to the roots of the case" and hence are admitted to be heard on merits.The appeal is restored to the file of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for adjudication of the additional grounds after consulting and verifying the assessment records and providing opportunity of hearing to the parties; the appellate authority is at liberty to call for any document, remand report, or pass any order as deemed fit according to law.The restoration of the matter to the appellate authority does not constitute any expression on the merits of the dispute, which shall be decided independently in accordance with law.

RATIONALE:

The court applied the procedural framework established by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in GKN Driveshaft (India) Ltd. vs. ITO, which mandates that before issuing a notice under section 148, the Assessing Officer must consider and dispose of objections raised by the assessee against the reasons recorded for reopening assessment.Reliance was placed on authoritative precedents including Jute Corporation of India Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, and Ahmedabad Electricity Co Ltd vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, which support admission of additional legal grounds that go to the root of jurisdictional validity.The court recognized the importance of procedural compliance to uphold jurisdictional validity in reassessment proceedings and emphasized the need for a clear factual record before adjudication.The decision reflects a doctrinal adherence to procedural fairness and due process in tax reassessment, ensuring that reopening of assessments is not arbitrary but follows prescribed judicial safeguards.

---