2020 (2) TMI 829

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ground no.1 raised by the assessee is against the order of ld. CIT(A) confirming the action of AO in completing the assessment without providing a copy of reasons recorded u/s 148(2) of the Act and thereby wrongly upholding the order of AO on the jurisdictional issue. The ground raised by the assessee is as under: "1. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A)-30, Mumbaí has erred in confirming the action of the assessing officer in completing the assessment without providing the copy of reasons recorded u/s. 148(2), thereby violating the principle/procedure laid down in case of: (a) GKN Driveshaft (I) Ltd. vs. ITO [259 ITR 19] (b) CIT vs. Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd. [340 ITR 66....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....on. 5. The facts in brief is that the assessee filed the return of income on 30.09.2009 declaring a total income of Rs. 3,47,138/- which was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act accepting the returned income. Thereafter the AO received information from DGIT(Inv.) Wing, Mumbai that the assessee is beneficiary of hawala purchase transactions from nine hawala parties to the tune of Rs. 2,56,68,849/- and accordingly the case of the assessee was reopened u/s 147 of the Act by issuing notice u/s 148 on 15.03.2014. The said notice was duly complied by the assessee by filing a letter dated 15.04.2014 requesting the AO to treat the return filed originally on 30.09.2009 as a compliance to this notice. Thereafter, the assessee requested the AO to supply....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....BOM-HC] (e) CIT v. IDBI Ltd. (ITA No. 494 of 2014)(Bom) 6.1 The ld. Counsel submitted that the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court has held that supply of reasons as recorded u/s 148(2) of the Act for reopening of an assessment is a jurisdictional requirement and the assessment framed by the AO in such scenario is without jurisdiction. The ld. AR therefore prayed the Bench that the assessment framed by the AO may kindly be quashed. 7. The ld. DR, though candidly admitted that the reasons have not been supplied during the assessment proceedings however submitted that the same were reproduced in the assessment order. The ld. DR requested that in such a scenario the best course would be to restore the issue back to the file of AO ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ng reasons is without jurisdiction and cannot be sustained. The case of the assessee is squarely covered by the decision of hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. M/s IDBI Ltd. (supra) wherein the hon'ble jurisdictional High Court has held as under: "(v)We find that the question as framed proceeds on the basis that the Respondent assessee was aware of the reasons for re-assessment. The only basis for the aforesaid submission is the submission made by the Revenue before the Tribunal that the Respondent Assessee is a public sector institution who was aware that search action has been initiated on certain lessees in respect of transactions with IDBI i.e. Respondent Assessee. On the basis of the above, it is to be inf....