2015 (4) TMI 1043

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... concise ground of appeal No.2, wherein the assumption of jurisdiction by the AO u/s. 148 of the Act was challenged as not fulfilling the mandatory requirements of the provisions of the Act. On the above issue, the Tribunal noticed that before the CIT(Appeals), the assessee had challenged only the action of the Assessing Officer in not furnishing the reasons recorded before issue of notice u/s. 148 of the Act. The CIT(A) was of the view that since the assessee did not ask for the reasons recorded in the course of assessment proceedings before the AO, non-furnishing of reasons recorded cannot be said to be illegal. The CIT(A), thus, upheld the validity of reopening of assessment proceedings. 3. Before the Tribunal, the assessee challenged t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the additional grounds were raised before the Tribunal for the first time and the Tribunal ought to have set aside the order of the CIT(Appeals) and remanded the case to CIT(Appeals) for deciding the appeal afresh on the additional ground, rather than to decide the same on merits for the first time by themselves. 5. The ld. DR reiterated the stand of the Revenue as contained in the petition and submitted that the order of Tribunal should be rectified. 6. The ld. counsel for the assessee submitted before us that the validity of assumption of jurisdiction u/s. 148 of the Act was challenged by the assessee before the CIT(A) and it cannot be said that the ground raised by the assessee before the Tribunal was an additional ground. According to....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s heard by the Tribunal. On this short ground itself, this petition is liable to be dismissed as devoid of any merit. 9. Apart from the above, it is seen that validity of initiation of reassessment proceedings is a jurisdictional issue and can be raised at any stage of proceedings. In the present case, validity of initiation of reassessment proceedings u/s. 148 had been raised by the assessee before the CIT(Appeals) and also raised before the Tribunal. It is open to the assessee to urge the different facets of validity of initiation of reassessment proceedings and it cannot be confined only to that facet which was raised by the assessee before the CIT(Appeals). The decision cited by the ld. counsel for the assessee clearly lay down the pro....