TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (8) TMI 575
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....That the Learned CIT(Appeals) erred both on facts and in law in upholding the initiation of proceedings u/s.147 of the Act and completion of the impugned assessment u/s.143(3)/147 of the Act without appreciating that the AO failed to communicate reasons for re-opening the case. 2. That the Learned CIT(Appeals) failed to appreciate that there being no material available on record for formation of 'reason to believe' that income of the appellant chargeable to tax had escaped assessment the action of the AO in initiating proceedings u/s.147 of the Act is unsustainable on facts and in law. 3. That the Learned CIT(Appeals) erred both on facts and in law in upholding the initiation of proceedings u/s.147 of the Act and completion of the impugned assessment without appreciating the fact that year-wise investment having been fully disclosed in the balance sheet filed with the return and the case having not been taken up for scrutiny by service of notice u/s.143(2) of the Act within the stipulated time limit, recourse to section 147 could not have been taken by the AO particularly when the said section could not be used as a substitute for sections 143(2)/143(3) of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d had issued notice u/s.143(2)/142(1) dated 30.12.2012, however, despite specific request by the assessee for copy of the "reasons to believe" on the basis of which his case was reopened u/s.147 of the Act, failed to furnish the same. Assessment, was thereafter, framed by the A.O vide his order passed u/s.143(3) dated 29.03.2014 determining the income of the assessee at Rs.22,95,060/-. 5. Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(Appeals) but without any success. 6. The assessee being aggrieved with the order of the CIT(Appeals) has carried the matter in appeal before us. 7. At the very outset of the hearing of the appeal, it was submitted by the Ld. AR that the impugned assessment had been framed by the A.O without providing to the assessee a copy of the "reasons to believe" on the basis of which his case was reopened u/s.147 of the Act. It was submitted by the Ld. AR that though the assessee had duly complied with the notice u/s.148 of the Act and filed his return of income, but the AO despite specific request had not made available to him a copy of the "reasons to believe" on the basis of which his case was reopened u/s. 147 of the Act. It was ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ecorded and approval obtained, if any, for issuance of Notice under reference to enable us to raise our objections. Thanking you, Sd/- Yours faithfully V.K Khatri (Counsel to the assessee)" As per the assessment records, it transpires that the A.O had vide an order sheet entry made a reference of the aforesaid letter dated 30.10.2012 (supra) that was filed by the assessee's Counsel viz., Shri V.K.Khatri, CA, which reads as under: "30.10.2012: A letter received in Dak counter from Shri V.K Khatri, CA and Counsel for the a; in her written reply the counsel of the assessee stated that the return of income filed on 18.03.2011 may be treated as return filed in compliance to notice u/s.148" 10. As the assessee had claimed that the A.O had despite specific request failed to make available a copy of the "reasons to believe" on the basis of which his case was reopened u/s.147 of the Act, therefore, in order to verify the veracity of his said claim we had called for the assessment records and perused the same. On a perusal of the records, we find that the assessee in the course of the assessment proceedings had specifically requeste....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Hon'ble High Court had after taking cognizance of the fact that the A.O in the case before them had failed to communicate the "reasons to believe" on the basis of which the case of the assessee was reopened, quashed the assessment by treating the same as having been passed in a brazen violation of the governing principles of law. The relevant observations of the Hon'ble High Court are culled out as under: "4. On these admitted facts, it is evident that there has been a complete violation of the applicable principles of law by the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer was required to communicate the reasons for reopening the assessment which he has failed to do. The Assessing Officer despite the judgment of the Supreme Court in GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd., [2003] 259 ITR 19 (SC) has failed to provide an opportunity to the assessee to submit his objections to the reopening of the assessment. In the affidavit-in-reply, it has been submitted that the assessee was well aware of the reasons for the reopening of the assessment as the reasons were on the record for the assessment year 2007-08. This is clearly a specious explanation. According to counsel appearing on behalf of ....