2012 (1) TMI 384

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e AO u/s.144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act was without supplying the reasons recorded for reopening of the case and therefore, the whole assessment against the provisions of the law, in violation of the principles of natural justice and hence deserves to be annulled." 2. The brief facts as appearing in the assessment order as under:- "the DCIT, Circle-1, Navsari vide his letter dtd. 6.8.1999 has referred the case of M/s. Deep Laxmi Apartment, Navsari to Assistant Valuation Officer, Baroda u/s.131(1)(d) of the I.T. Act to elucidate the correctness of the cost of land/bungalow/property, and requiring the AVO to inspect the land/property/bungalow and to determine the true and correct cost of land/property/bungalow etc. Accordingly, the DVO, Ahmedab .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the case of Deep Laxmi Apartment for A.Y. 1998-99, 99-2000 and 2000-01." Before the Ld. CIT(A) the assessee raised ground No.4, which is reproduced as under:- "(4) The ITO, Ward-1, Navsari has erred in making assessment u/s.144 r.w.s 147 of the Act, without supply the reasons recorded for re-opening of the case is against the provisions of law and hence not justified." 3. The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the ground of the assessee, which is reproduced for the sake of clarity as under:- "7.1 In this connection, the facts as laid down before me revels that no request to obtain the copy of the reasons recorded was separately made by the appellant before the AO. Secondly, the assessment proceedings were carried out in the case of "Deeplaxmi Apart .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the assessee had raised grounds challenging the quantum addition, however, since the issue on jurisdiction has been restored back and that legal issue is to be settled first therefore at present at this stage it is not viable to decide these grounds as it was suggested in the case of Rahulkumar Bajaj v. ITO (1999) 69 ITD 1 (SB) (Nag). The other grounds are not accordingly being decided and the matter is sent to the file of AO who will decide the other issues de novo after passing a speaking order as directed above but by affording an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. This Order pronounced in Open Court on 31/01/2012.
Case laws, Decisions, Judgemen .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X