2023 (1) TMI 1415

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n merits. The legal issue raised by the revenue is that the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in quashing the order AO on the ground that the AO has not disposed off the objections filed by the assessee against the re-opening of assessment. First of all we shall adjudicate the legal issue. 3. The facts in brief are that the return of income was filed by the assessee on 21.03.2015 declaring total income of Rs. 1,12,83,821/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny under CASS and assessment was framed u/s 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 29.12.2016. Thereafter the AO reopened the assessment u/s 147 of the Act by issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act dated 15.11.2017 after recording the reasons that income of the assessee has escaped assessment....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....a) along with other decisions have been discussed by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of General Motors India (P) Ltd. vs. DCIT (supra) and the Hon'ble High Court after detailed deliberation has come to the following conclusions: - "23. From the aforesaid decision, we are of the considered opinion that writ petition wider Article 226 of the Constitution of India is maintainable where no order has been passed by the Assessing Officer deciding objection filed by the assessee under sec. 148 of the Act and assessment order has been passed or the order deciding an objection under sec. 148 of the Act has not been communicated to the assessee and assessment Order has been passed or the objection filed under sec. 148 has been....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of the opinion that the assessment has to be quashed for the reason of non-disposal of objections for the re-opening of assessment by the Assessing Officer. A similar view was taken by the Hon'ble High Gujarat High Court in the case Arvind Mills Ltd. vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Wealth 2004 270 ITR 469 Guj and in the case of Bayer Material Science Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT, W.P. No. 2502 of 2015; judgment dated 27/01/2016 (Bom. H.C) 3.1. Consistent with the view taken therein, I quash the assessment as bad in law." 6. In view of the above decisions, I find that the AO is mandated to decide the objection to the notice under sec. 148 of the Act and supply or communicate it to ' the appellant. Thereafter, the appellant gets an ....