TMI Blog2020 (2) TMI 829X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessee is squarely covered by the decision of hon ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. M/s IDBI Ltd. [ 2016 (10) TMI 166 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] - The appeal of the assessee is allowed on legal issues. - ITA No.7413/MUM/2018 (Assessment Year: 2009-10) - - - Dated:- 31-1-2020 - SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Appellant by: Devendra Jain, Advocate Respondent by: R. Bhoopathi, CIT ORDER Per Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member: The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 12.02.2018 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [hereinafter referred to as the CIT(A)] relevant to assessment year 2009-10. 2. The assessee cha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lay has occurred in filing the appeal. The ld. AR submitted that since the reasons are beyond the control of the assessee, the same may kindly be taken leniently and the delay may kindly be condoned. The ld. DR, on the other hand, opposed the admission of the appeal, however left the issue to the discretion of the Bench. 4. After hearing both the parties, perusing the material on record, we observe that the delay has happened because of preoccupation of the Chartered Accountant of the assessee which in our opinion is a reasonable cause for non-filing the appeal within the due time. The said delay cannot be attributed to be deliberate or willfully on the part of the assessee. Besides, the delay is only of 10 days. Accordingly we condone ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) r.w.s 147 by upholding the reopening of the assessment. 6. The ld. AR vehemently submitted before us that supplying or providing copy of the reasons to believe is sine qua non for a valid assessment lest in absence of supplying reasons to the assessee during assessment proceedings, the assessment becomes null and void and has no sanctity in the eyes of law. In defence of the arguments, the ld. AR relied on the decisions of Hon ble Supreme Court and Hon ble jurisdictional High Court reported in ITA No.494 of 2014 (a) GKN Driveshaft (I) Ltd. vs. ITO [259 ITR 19] (SC) (b) CIT vs. Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd. [340 ITR 66 (2011)] [Bom- HC] (c) CIT v. Fomento Resorts and Hotels Ltd. (ITA No. 71 of 2006) [Bom-HC] (d) CIT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o requested for supplying of reasons recorded u/s 148 however, the same was not supplied to the assessee, thus non-supply of reasons during assessment proceedings is also undisputed. Now, the only issue before us for adjudication is whether the assessment is valid in absence of or for the want of supply of reasons recorded u/s 148(2) of the Act. In our opinion, the requirement of supply of reasons u/s 148 of the Act when the assessee has specifically requested for the same after complying with the notice u/s 148 is sine qua non and goes to the root of the jurisdiction of the AO. In our opinion, the assessment framed without supplying reasons recorded u/s 148 deprives the assessee from filing the objections to the said reopening. Therefore t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he above count is unsustainable. (vi) An alternative submission is made on behalf of the Revenue that the obligation to supply reasons on the Assessing Officer was consequent to the decision of the Apex Court that GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. vs. Income-tax Officer rendered in 2003 while, in the present case, the reopening notice is dated 9 December 1996. Thus it submitted at the time when the notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued and the time when assessment was completed, there was no such requirement to furnish to the assessee a copy of the reasons recorded. This submission is not correct. We find that the impugned order relies upon the decision of this Court in Seista Steel Construction (P.) Ltd. (supra) when it is held t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
