TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (7) TMI 1073
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....50 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short "the Act"] for the A.Y 2009 -10. 2. In this case, the Assessee had declared its total income at Rs. 68,42,900/- by filing return of income on dated 29.09.2009, which was assessed u/s. 143(3) of the Act and vide assessment order dated 29.12.2011. 3. Subsequently, the case of the Assessee was reopened u/s. 147 of the Act by issuing notice dated 23.03.2016 u/s. 148 of the Act, on the following reasons. The return of income for the A.Y. 2009 - 10 was filed on 29.09.2009 declaring total income at Rs. 68,42,900/ Subsequently assessment u/s. 143(3) of the Act has been completed on 29.12.2011. 2. Thereafter, information has been received from the investigation Wing of the Income Tax D....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for its assessment for that Assessment Year during the scrutiny proceedings u/s. 143(3) of the I. T. Act. 4. The Assessee in response to aforesaid notice u/s. 148 of the Act, filed its reply on dated 04.04.2016 and claimed that the return filed on dated 29.09.2009 may be treated as return filed in response to the notice u/s. 148 of the Act. The Assessee by such letter dated 04.04.2016 and thereafter vide letter dated 21.05.2016, also requested to provide the reasons recorded for issuing notice u/s. 148 of the Act. 5. The Assessing Officer [in short "the Ld.AO"] without providing the reasons for reopening as sought for by the Assessee, somehow proceeded with the assessment p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d in law 1. The NFAC failed to appreciate that the AO had issued the notice u/s. 142(1) & 143(2) of the Act and proceeded with the assessment even before providing the recorded reasons and without disposing of the objections of the Appellant. Therefore, the reopening of assessment is bad in law and the assessment order dated 05.12.2016 is liable to be quashed and set aside. 9. As the ground raised by the Assessee, is legal in nature and goes to the roots of the case and therefore we deem it appropriate to decide this legal ground first, before proceedings to the merits of the case. 10. The Assessee at the outset has demonstrated that the AO in response to the letter dated 04.04.2016, provided the reasons for reopening, vide l....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nts, referred to by the Assessee. 12. Heard the parties and perused the material available on record. As observed above, admittedly the AO in response to the letter dated 04.04.2016 filed by the Assessee in response to the notice on dated 26.03.2016 u/s. 148 of the Act, communicated/supplied the reasons recorded for reopening of the proceeding u/s. 147 of the Act vide letter dated 15.07.2016, against which the Assessee filed its objections. The AO thereafter duly disposed of such objections, vide order dated 09.09.2016. 13. Admittedly the AO in response to the letterdated 04.0 4.2016 and thereafter again on dated 20.05.2016 by which the Assessee had sought for reasons recorded, issued the initial notice dated 01.07.2016 u/s. 142(....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(supra), is mandatory procedure, which would vitiate the assessment order . 16. We further observe that the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Fomento Resorts & Hotels Ltd VS ITO, in Tax Appeal No. 63 of 2007 decided on dated 30.08.2019 has also taken into consideration the judgment in GKN Driveshafts (Ind) Ltd case (supra),and set aside the impugned order for want of compliance with the jurisdictional parameters, as laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in such case. 17. The Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd ., [2012] 21 taxmann.com 53 / 304 ITR 66 has also considered the parameters set out by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of GKN Driveshafts (Ind) Ltd (supra) andheld "that non-....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tions on dated 31.08.2021 and thereafter passed the assessment order dated 19.09.2021, finally. 20. Thus, the Hon'ble High Court by considering the judgment in the case of GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd (supra) held "that without disposing off the objections raised by the Assessee vide letter on dated 03.06.2020, notice u/s. 142(1) of the Act was issued to the Assessee on dated 05.02.2021 by the Ld.AO, thus this was in violation of the principles set out in such decision" and ultimately quashed the notice dated 06.03.2020 u/s. 148 of the Act, the order disposing off the objections dated 31.08.2021 and the assessment order dated 19.09.2021 by allowing writ petition of the Assessee. 21. As the mandate of the Hon'ble High Courts is clea....