TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (6) TMI 208
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed to as the 'Act'). Since common issues involved in all these appeals, hence these have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. The assessee's appeal ITA No.1169/Kol/2019 is taken as the lead case for the purpose of narration of facts. 2. ITA No.1169/Kol/2019 - The brief facts of the case are that an information was received from the Investigation Wing pursuant to a survey and search action carried out in the case of one Shri Sanjiw Kumar Singh who has been found to be involved in providing accommodation entries in the form of bogus bills to various parties in lieu of commission. It was pointed out that the assessee was also one of the beneficiaries and had received accommodation entries to the tune of Rs. 8,53....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ent was bad in law. That the assessment framed by the Assessing Officer was not valid because of non- adjudication of the objections filed by the assessee. The ld. CIT(A) called remand report from the Assessing Officer in this respect. However, since the Assessing Officer did not send any remand report, the ld. CIT(A) proceeded to decide the objections of the assessee himself and held that the Assessing Officer was justified in forming the reasons to believe that the income of the assessee has escaped assessment. However, on merits, the ld. CIT(A) observed that the Assessing Officer since had not disputed the corresponding sales to the aforesaid purchases, therefore, only profit element was required to be added. The ld. CIT(A) therefore est....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d that even the assessee had filed written objections against the reopening of the assessment, however, the Assessing Officer without deciding the said objections, proceeded to frame the assessment which was bad in law. He in this respect has relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. v. ITO (2003) 259 ITR 19 (SC)/[2002] 125 Taxman 963 (SC) and further on the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Asian Paints Ltd. v. DCIT (2009) 308 ITR 195 (Bom.). The ld. counsel in this respect has placed reliance upon the decision of the Jurisdictional Calcutta High Court in the case of PCIT vs. M/s Sambuddha Tracon Pvt. Ltd. ITAT/90/2022 IA No.GA/2/2022 vide order dated 15.11.2022....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Officer does not accept the objections of the assessee, he shall not proceed further in the matter for a period of four weeks from the date of rejection of the said objections. The purpose is to enable the assessee to avail his legal remedies against the rejection of those objections. In this case, admittedly, the Assessing Officer did not decide the objections of the assessee. The ld. CIT(A) has clearly mentioned in the impugned order, "the violation of the apex court guidelines in the above case in this respect appears to have been done by the A.O". However, the ld. CIT(A) thereafter noted that the said violation was not fatal to the assessment but that was only an irregularity. He further observed that it can be taken care of by asking ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....wever, the power to reopen the assessment exclusively vests with the Assessing Officer only. It is the Assessing Officer who has to form the belief of escapement of income of the assessee and it is the Assessing Officer who has to decide the objections against the reopening of the assessment and further to give opportunity to the assessee to seek his legal remedy, if the objections are decided against the assessee and not to pass an assessment order for a period of four weeks from the rejection of objections. Therefore, the assessment framed by the Assessing Officer without disposal of objections of the assessee cannot be held to be a valid assessment. The issue is squarely covered by the decision of Jurisdictional Calcutta High Court in th....