TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (4) TMI 722
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....escaped assessment: and in doing so the Ld. CIT(A) failed to consider the binding ratio of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Home Finders Housing Ltd. vs. ITO [2018] 404 ITR 611 (SC) which held that non-compliance with the procedure prescribed in GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. v. ITO [(2003) 259 ITR 19 SC does not render the reassessment order void ab initio, but is a curable defect rectifiable by remitting the matter to the Assessing Officer. 2. The appellant craves to be allowed to add any fresh ground(s) of appeal and or deleted or amend any of the ground(s) of appeal. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed return of income on 30-09-2012 declaring income of Rs. 9,33,110/-. Subsequently the case of assessee was selected for scrutiny and order u/s 143(3) of the Act was passed on 16-03-2015 assessing the total income at Rs. 13,61,020/-. Thereafter information was received from the DDIT(Inv.) from Unit 3(1) Kolkata vide letter 01-03-2019 wherein it was mentioned that search and seizure action was conducted against Sh. Praveen Aggarwal group by the DDT (Inv.) Unit1(3). The Assessing Officer formed reasons to believe that amounting to Rs. 12 Crores has escaped....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... No. 2344/Del/2024 (iii) Hewlett Financial services (India) Pvt, Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 3(1)(2) W.P. No. 2392of 2019 (iv) Income Tax Officer, ward-62910 Delhi vs. Rajesh Gupta ITA NO. 4250/Del/ 2025 7. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. In this appeal single grievance of the Department is that the Ld. CIT(A) quashed the assessment order for non- disposal of the objection filed by the assessee against the reopening of the assessment. The Revenue has placed reliance on the decision rendered in the case of Home Finders Housing Ltd. vs. ITO [2018]404 ITR 611(SC) and submitted that non-disposal of the objections are procedural formality. We note the same issue was decided by the tribunal in the case of ITO v. Hardeep Singh and held as under: 2. The facts of the case as emanating from records are; Notice u/s. 148 of Income Tax Act, 1961(hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') was issued to the assessee on 23.03.2018. In response to the said notice, the assessee filed return of income on 05.05.2018 declaring income of Rs. 1,34,955/- and agricultural income of Rs. 2,70,468/-. The assessee ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....plete the assessment. Deciding of objections against reopening is not merely a procedural formality but goes to the root of validity of reassessment proceedings. He further pointed that letter dated 05.09.2018 vide which the AO is stated to have disposed of the objections does not deal with objections of the assessee at all, it only says that proceedings u/s. 148 of the Act have been initiated on the basis of cash deposits and copy of reasons u/s. 148 of the Act have already been supplied to the assessee and the assessee is now required to explain the source of cash deposits along with documentary evidences. Thus, a perusal of letter would show that it does not deal with the detailed objections filed by the assessee against reopening of assessment. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted the various High Courts including jurisdictional High Court have held that the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has to be necessarily followed. If any order is passed in violation of the law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court it is without jurisdiction. To buttress his arguments he placed reliance on following decisions:- i. Ferrous Infrastructure P. Ltd. vs DCIT, 2015 (5) T....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... 7. The Revenue has placed reliance on the decision rendered in the case of Home Finders Housing Ltd. vs. ITO (supra), to contend that non disposal of objections are mere procedural formality and would not make reassessment order void ab initio. 7.1. The assessee has placed reliance on various decisions to contend that non disposal of assessee's objections by the AO by passing a separate, speaking order is fatal to the assessment. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ferrous Infrastructure P. Ltd. (supra) on the issue of non compliance of directions of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of GKN Driveshafts (supra) held: "8. We may also point out that the second issue raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners also deserves some consideration. In GKN Driveshafts (supra), the Supreme Court had directed as under:- "However, we clarify that when a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act is issued, the proper course of action for the noticee is to file return and if he so desires, to seek reasons for issuing notices. The assessing officer is bound to furnish reasons within a reasonable time. On receipt of reasons, the noti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ndia) Ltd. (supra) not only binds the assessee, but also the Revenue. Filing of objections to the reasons for reopening is not an empty formality. If this is so, passing a speaking order on the objections cannot be treated as an empty formality and to be brushed aside as a procedural error. The purpose for passing a speaking order on the objections is to afford an opportunity to the assessee to question the same, in the event the assessee is aggrieved by such an order. Therefore, to state that it would be sufficient for the Assessing Officer to deal with the objections in the assessment order and thereafter, if the assessee is aggrieved, he can file a statutory appeal, is a proposition which would be against the principles of natural justice. Therefore, if an order violates the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, then it has to be necessarily held to be an order without jurisdiction. The law declared by the Hon'ble Apex Court is a binding character and is a source of law and to itself which will bind all authorities. 37. xxxxxxx 38. xxxxxxx 39.The Hon'ble Supreme Court in GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. (supra) had clarified that when a n....