9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 452X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 9-10. In order to appreciate the petitioner's challenge to the impugned notice, few facts need mention which are stated infra. 4. The petitioner is a partnership firm registered under the provisions of Indian Partnership Act, 1932 and is an assessee of the Income Tax Act. The petitioner is carrying on the business of builders and developers. On 29.09.2009, the petitioner filed its return of income under Section 139(1) of the Act and declared the income of Rs. 6,43,160/- for the assessment year 2009-2010. Thereafter, on 26.10.2009 the petitioner filed a revised return of income. On 11.01.2011, the return of income was selected for scrutiny and a notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was issued to the petitioner. The Assessing Officer issue ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oner, on 27.06.2016, sent a communication before the Assessing Officer for filing return of income in response of notice issued under Section 148 of the Act. In the aforesaid factual background, the petitioner has approached this Court seeking the reliefs stated supra. 7. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned notice dated 31.12.2015 issued by the Assessing Officer under Section 148 of the Act is per se without jurisdiction as the same has been issued after a period of four years from the relevant assessment year i.e. 2009-10. It is further submitted that the conditions mentioned in the proviso to Section 147(1) of the Act have not at all been satisfied. While inviting the attention of this Court to the reasons ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... IONER OF INCOME TAX AND ANOTHER v. HEWELETT PACKARD DIGITAL GLOBAL SOFT LTD.', in the case of 'COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX v. ANKIT MAHESHWARI', (2014) 366 ITR 146 (Guj), in the case of 'STANDARD CHARTERED FINANCE LTD. v. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ANOTHER', (2016) 381 ITR 453 (SC) and in the case of 'COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ANOTHER v. MANJUNATHA COTTON AND GINNING FACTORY AND OTHERS' (2013) 359 ITR 565 (Karn.) in support of his contention that where there is a failure on the part of the Assessing Officer to disclose fully and truly all material facts, the notice issued under Section 148 of the Act has to be quashed. 9. On the other hand, learned counsel for the revenue has submitted that the reasons admittedly have been s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for the noticee is to file a return and to seek reasons for issuing notice, if he so desires. On receipt of reasons, the noticee is entitled to file objections to issuance of notice and the Assessing Officer is bound to dispose of the same by passing a speaking order. In view of the aforesaid enunciation of law by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and in the facts of the case, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a direction that in case the petitioner files an objection containing all the grounds challenging the notice dated 31.12.2015 issued by the Assessing Officer within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order passed today, the Assessing Officer shall afford an opportunity of hearing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
