TMI Blog2019 (7) TMI 1689X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... [2016 (7) TMI 1587 - ITAT BANGALORE] wherein it has been held that where the reasons recorded are not supplied to the assessee, the order of reassessment would be without jurisdiction. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No.3120/MUM/2015 - - - Dated:- 17-7-2019 - SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For the Assessee : Shri Dharmesh Shah, A.R., Shri Dhaval Shah, A.R. For the Revenue : Dr. P. Daniel, (Spl. Counsel for Deptt.) ORDER Per Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member: The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 19.03.2015 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [hereinafter referred to as the CIT(A)] relevant to assessment year 1995-96. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that as per the decision of Hon'ble Special Court dated 30.04.2010 in MP No. 41 of 1999, the assets under consideration and the consequential income belongs to Late Shri Harshad S. Mehta and hence the income assessed by the Assessing Officer ought to have been taxed in the hands of Late Shri Harshad S. Mehta and not in the hands ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... owing decisions in defense of his arguments: 1. National Thermal Power Corporation vs. CIT (229 ITR 386 SC) 2. Jute Corporation of India vs. CIT [187 ITR 688 (SC)] 3. Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. vs. CIT [199 ITR 351 (Bom.) (FB)] 4. CIT vs. Pruthvi Brokers and Shareholders Pvt. Ltd. (2012) 349 ITR 336 (Bom.) The Ld. A.R. therefore submitted that the additional ground may kindly be admitted and adjudicated in view of the ratio laid down in the above decisions. 6. The Ld. D.R., on the other hand, objected to the admission of the additional ground on the ground that the issue was not pressed by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) though the ground was specifically raised and also this being a second round of litigation, the assessee has not taken this in the earlier round and thus it can not be raised now before the Tribunal and thus prayed before the Bench that the same may kindly be dismissed. 7. Replying to the objection raised by the Ld. D.R., the Ld. Counsel of the assessee submitted that even if the issue is not pressed before the Ld. CIT(A), it would not preclude the assessee from raising the ground before the Tribunal. The Ld. A.R. relied on a couple of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e copy of reasons recorded for reopening the assessment despite the repeated requests made by the assessee. The Ld. A.R. submitted that failure of the AO to provide copy of reasons recorded rendered the initiation of reassessment proceedings and consequent assessment order as invalid and void. The Ld. A.R. submitted that assessee has requested the AO on numerous occasions vide letter dated 19.04.1999, 02.03.2001, 30.05.2018 and 01.05.2019 to provide copies of reasons recorded, however, the request of the assessee went unheeded till date. The Ld. A.R. drew the attention of the Bench to the above letters pointing out that the assessee has specifically requested for supply of reasons recorded for reopening the assessment. The Ld. A.R. submitted that these facts were never denied by the Ld. D.R. at the time of hearing and thus it can be presumed that AO has not recorded any reason for reopening the assessment and on this count itself the notice under section 148 of the Act and consequent assessment order may be quashed. The Ld. A.R. relied on a series of decisions namely CIT vs. IDBI Ltd. (76 Taxmann.com 227)(Bom), CIT vs. Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd. (340 ITR 66)(Bom), Pr. CIT vs. Jagat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t set of facts and not applicable to the present case. The Ld. A.R. submitted that in that case the assessment was completed by way of intimation under section 143(1) of the Act and subsequently reassessment proceedings were taken up wherein the contentions of the assessee was that reopening was based upon the change of opinion as the issue has already been verified as intimation under section 143(1) is already issued and the Hon ble Court has held that there is no assessment carried out and it will not be a case of change of opinion and reopening was held to be valid. The Ld. A.R. submitted that the present case is with respect to non supply of reasons and not qua the change of opinion and thus this is clearly distinguishable on facts. The Ld. A.R. finally prayed before the Bench that the reassessment proceedings as well as the consequent reassessment order may be quashed as the same is without jurisdiction. 13. We have heard the submissions of both the parties and perused the material on record including the various citations by the rival parties. We observe that in this case the assessee has not filed any return of income despite the issue of notice under section 148 due to t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
