TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (11) TMI 1639
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....2013 in other premises of one Trikot Iron & Steel Casting Ltd. including factory, registered office and residence of directors. Various incriminating documents whereof were seized. Further that, such recording of reasons was also on the basis of the statement made by one Sharad Bansal, Director of the Company dated 26.09.2013 which was admittedly retracted on the very same day appearing at page 75 of the paper book filed before us. No search, whatsoever, has been conducted by the Income-Tax Authority in the case of the assessee. Thus, the reasons have been on the basis of borrowed satisfaction, meaning thereby, no independent application of mind made by the A.O. while recording reasons as contended by the Ld. AR. As the initiation of reassessment proceedings is on borrowed satisfaction and in the absence of independent finding of the AO vis-à-vis reasons to belief that any income escaped assessment rather than relying upon the information received from the DGCEI on the basis of a third party search, the initiation of proceedings is bad in law and thus the finalization of the same upon making addition is not sustainable in the eyes of law, as the main submission made by the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....essing Officer's order has been challenged as void ab initio since the same has been made without passing a separate order on the basis of the objection of the assessee raised challenge the jurisdiction in exercising powers under Section 148 of the Act. 7. Further that the Assessing Officer does not have valid jurisdiction under Section 148 of the Act as no approval under Section 151 of the Act has been obtained by the Assessing Officer. There is no new fact brought by the assessee before us and these grounds could be raised even before us for consideration of the issue involved in the matter as per the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of NTPC Ltd. Vs. CIT reported in 229 ITR 383 (S.C) contended by the Ld. AR. 8. Having regard to this particular aspect of the matter, we, therefore, admit these additional ground preferred by the assessee raised before us. 9. Since the additional ground challenging the entry of the assessment proceedings relates to non-disposal of the objection raised by the assessee against the reopening of assessment goes to the root of the matter concerning the maintainability of the proceedings, we would like to deal with the sam....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of accounts has escaped assessment in case of M/s Baba Alloys Pvt. Ltd. within the meaning of Section 147/148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. * Your office has relied on the information, which is not yet finalized by the Central Excise department. The hearing is under process there with Central Excise department. The fact may be confirmed by your office with respective office. * Please provide us the information of department as well as statement of Mr. Sharad Goel and authorized person of Trikot Iron and Steel Casting Private Limited, so that we may examine the same. * No suspicious material is on record with your office except report of Central Excise Department. No enquiry is being done by your office before the opening of the case. In the light of the above, please provide us the copy of documents in your possession and investigation done by your office on basis of which, your office made reliance that the case is fit case of opening U/s. 147/148. Thanking you, Yours faithfully, For JPRMS & Co. Chartered Accountants Sd/- (CA Peyush N Gupta) Partner" 9.1 Relevant to mention ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n the matter of ACIT vs. Mondal Constructions Co. Ltd. (supra) and finally the assessment order stood quashed in the absence of non-disposal of the objection filed by the assessee against the reasons for issuance of notice under Section 148 of the Act by a speaking order. The said Bench has been pleased to observe as follows: "5. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record as placed before us. The undisputed facts are that the AO has not disposed off the objection filed by the assessee against the re-opening before framing the assessment which in our opinion is a substantive defect which goes to the root of the matter. We have carefully perused the order of ld. CIT (A) and find no infirmity therein as the ld. CIT (A) allowed the appeal of the assessee on this legal issue by following various decisions as discussed in the appellate order. It is trite law that the assessment framed AY: 2014-15 Mondal Construction Co. Ltd. without disposing of objections filed by the assessee against the reopening of assessment is not a valid assessment and cannot not be sustained. The case of the assessee finds support from the decision of the GKN Driveshafts ....