TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2011 (4) TMI 1459
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is order dated 31.03.2005. 2. The first legal issue in this appeal of the assessee is as regards to the order of CIT(A) not adjudicating the issue of jurisdiction i.e. reassessment u/s. 147 r.w.s. 148 of the Act. For this, the assessee has raised the following effective grounds: "2. For that the ld. CIT(A.) erred in confirming the action under section. 147 initiated in the case of the assessee which were unlawful and not in accordance with law. 3. For that the ld. CIT(A.) erred in confirming the action under section when no reasons were recorded in the case of the assessee and the copy of the reasons recorded or detailed notings in the notes attached to the assessment order in the case of G.S. Sureka for the assessment ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... completed the reassessment determining the taxable income of Rs. 32.26 lakh. The AO completed the reassessment consequent to the direction of ITAT. Reopening of assessment under section. 147 is not a subject matter in this assessment order passed on 31.3.2005. This order is only reassessment and not order passed consequent to reopening under section. 147. Hence, the grounds of appeal raised by the appellant are not relevant for the reassessment order which is a subject matter of this appeal. Grounds of appeal are not maintainable". The ld. counsel for the assessee stated that this being a legal issue can be raised at any time and CIT(A) should have adjudicated the same. Hence, he requested the Bench to adjudicate this issue now. On the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion the said jurisdiction can be disputed at any time and even in the second round of appeal passed on remand. This view of ours is supported by the decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of P. V. Doshi Vs. CIT (1978) 113 ITR 22 (Guj.), which is directly on the issue that assessee can dispute the validity of reassessment proceedings even in the second round of appeal. Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of P. V. Doshi (supra) held as under: "Therefore, if this settled position was borne in mind, the Tribunal's view was clearly erroneous that the matter became final when the Tribunal passed the earlier remand order so that this point of jurisdiction got finally settled, which could not be agitated unless the asses....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he memoranda of appeals filed before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. It is not disputed that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner did not touch on this point in his common order dated August 17, 1972, and decided the appeals on merits in favour of the assessee. As such, it would be deemed that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner decided the point of jurisdiction against the assessee. Admittedly, the said point of jurisdiction was duly raised before the learned Tribunal by learned counsel for the assessee before the close of his arguments. Even an application was moved by him at that time. Rule 27, Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963, provides that the respondent, though he may not have appealed, may support the order appealed....