Reassessment invalid for failure to dispose of objections by a speaking order before completing the assessment.

Reassessment was held unsustainable because objections to the reopening notice were not disposed of by a separate speaking order before the assessment was completed. The Tribunal applied the settled requirement that such objections must be considered and decided in substance before further reassessment proceedings continue, and found the Revenue's relied-upon communication did not amount to a valid disposal of the objections. It also noted that dismissal of an earlier special leave petition at the threshold did not create a binding declaration of law under Article 141. The assessee therefore succeeded.

---

---

Issues: Whether reassessment was vitiated because the Assessing Officer did not dispose of the assessee's objections to reopening by a separate speaking order before completing assessment.

Analysis: The assessment was reopened under the provisions governing reassessment, and the core controversy was whether the objections raised against the notice were properly decided before the reassessment was completed. The Tribunal applied the principle that objections to reopening must be disposed of by a speaking order before proceeding further. It found, on the record, that the communication relied upon by the Revenue did not deal with the assessee's objections in substance and therefore did not amount to a valid disposal of objections. The Tribunal also treated dismissal of the earlier special leave petition at the threshold as not constituting a declaration of law binding under Article 141.

Conclusion: The reassessment was held unsustainable for non-disposal of objections in the prescribed manner, and the assessee succeeded.

---