TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2011 (9) TMI 1172
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e common and the appeals were heard together, so these are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. 3. One common issue in all the assessee's appeals vide grounds No.2[A] and 2[B] which was argued at the first instance reads as under: "2[A]. The order of assessment u/s. 147 is bad in law and void-ab-initio for want of requisite jurisdiction especially, the mandatory requirements to assume jurisdiction u/s. 148 of the Act did not exist and have not been complied with and consequently, the re-assessment requires to be cancelled. 2[B]. The reassessment is bad in law as the learned A.O. has not passed an order rejecting the objections of the appellant submitted after furnishing the reasons recoded as requir....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssment year has escaped assessment. The assessee requested to treat the return already filed on 2.5.2002 as the return filed in response to notice u/s. 148 of the Act. 7. The AO framed the reassessment for the A.Y. 2001-02 at an income of ₹ 13,51,260 by making certain additions. The assessee carried the matter to the ld. CIT(Appeals) and besides challenging the additions, had also challenged the validity of notice u/s. 148 by stating that the AO had no jurisdiction u/s. 147 and the reassessment made by him was bad in law as he had not passed an order rejecting the objections of the assessee in view of the guidelines given by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. GKN Driveshafts India Ltd. 259 ITR 19. It was also contended t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ount for which the appellant was unable to explain properly with documentary evidences. The Assessing Officer has found that the appellant has not disclosed savings bank account No.16978 with Canara Bank, Valencia Branch, Mangalore in his return of income for asst year 2001-02. He has also not maintained books of account in respect of Mangalore Driving School. Therefore, the Assessing Officer is right in re-opening the assessment for the asst year under consideration in view of the provisions of section 147 of the I.T. Act, 1961. In the case of CIT v. S.R. Constructions 257 ITR 502 (Mad), it was held that two conditions must exist before issuing notice under section 148 (i) that the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that income charge....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of jurisdiction under section 147 was in conformity with the law and in order. (i) CIT v. Vipin Batra 293 ITR 389 (Delhi) (ii) Dhanya Kumar Jain v. Asst CIT 298 ITR 396 (MP):- True disclosure of income not made by assessee. Notice for reassessment proper. (iii) Reach Cable Networks Ltd. v. DDIT 299 ITR 316 (Delhi):- Material for prima facie belief that income had escaped assessment, notice valid. In view of the above discussion, in my considered opinion, assumption of jurisdiction under section 147 by the Assessing Officer was in conformity with the law and in order." 9. Now the assessee is in appeal. During the course of hearing, the ld. counsel for the assessee reiterated the submissions made before the ld. CIT(Appeals) and furt....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....case of GKN Driveshafts India Ltd. v. ITO & Ors. (2003) (supra) at page 20 held as under: "…. The Assessing Officer is bound to furnish reasons within a reasonable time. On receipt of reasons, the noticee is entitled to file objections to issuance of notice and the Assessing Officer is bound to dispose of the same by passing a speaking order. In the instant case, as the reasons have been disclosed in these proceedings, the Assessing Officer has to dispose of the objections, if filed, by passing a speaking order, before proceeding with the assessment in respect of the abovesaid five assessment years." 12. In the present case also, although the AO recorded the reasons and supplied the same to the assessee, but he had not disposed of....