TMI Blog2019 (5) TMI 1858X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orded reasons must be furnished to the assessee when the assessee sought for the reasons. We also find that Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of M/s. Bayer Material Science Pvt. Ltd. [ 2016 ( ) TMI 179 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] after considering the decision of Hon ble Apex Court in the case of GKN Driveshafts [ 2002 (11) TMI 7 - SUPREME COURT] had held that the reassessment order to be non sustainable when the objections to the re-assessment were not disposed off by the AO. Similar view was taken by the Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of KSS Petron Pvt. Ltd. [ 2016 (10) TMI 1112 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] . Recording of reasons and furnishing of the same has to be strictly complied with as it is a jurisdictional issue and in the abse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order of Ld.CIT(A), assessee is now in appeal before us and has raised the following grounds : 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in dismissing the plea of the assessee that re-opening of the assessment invoking S. 147 was illegal and without jurisdiction since the action was taken by the A.O. keeping the valid return of income filed pending for assessment. The reliance was placed on the Hon'ble Supreme Court judgment. The reopening action u/s 147 being illegal and without jurisdiction the consequential assessment is also bad in law. It be quashed. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have considered the plea of the as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ances of the case and in law the appeal is delayed by few days. The assessee was prevented by sufficient cause. The balance of convenience is in favour of the assessee. The delay is not intentional. The appellant will file his application for condonation of delay supported by affidavit at the time of hearing. The delay be condoned and the appeal be admitted for hearing in accordance with the provisions of law. 3. Subsequently, assessee has raised additions grounds which reads as under : 1. Appellant contends that the reassessment proceedings initiated in Appellant's case were based on mere suspicion and not based on a valid reason to believe escapement of income. From the reasons recorded, it reveals, no any conspicuous applic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ourt in the case of Pruthvi Brokers and Shareholders reported as 349 ITR 336. Ld.D.R. did not seriously object to the additional grounds raised now by the assessee. 5. On the issue of admission of additional grounds raised by the assessee, considering the aforesaid facts and in view of the ratio laid down by the Hon ble Apex Court in the case of National Thermal (supra), we admit the additional grounds of appeal filed by the assessee for adjudication. 6. The case file reveals that there is delay of 253 days in filing the present appeal. Assessee filed an affidavit wherein he inter-alia submitted that the delay of 253 days in filing the present appeal occurred due to bonafide mistake and it is purely unintentional and therefore prayed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in ITA No.224 of 2014 and M/s. Bayer Material Science Pvt. Ltd. in WP No.2502 of 2015 order dated 27.01.2016 submitted that when AO has not followed the law laid down by the Hon ble Apex Court, the order passed by the AO lacks jurisdiction and therefore be set aside. 9. Ld.D.R. on the other hand, supported the order of AO and Ld.CIT(A). He also placed reliance on the decision of Home Finders Housing Limited Vs. ITO reported in (2018) 94 taxmann.com 84 (SC). 10. Ld.A.R. in the re-joinder submitted that the Hon ble Apex Court in the case of Home Finders Housing Limited has merely dismissed the SLP without assigning any reasons for dismissal. He relying on the decision of Hon ble Apex Court in the case of Kunhayammed and others Vs. State ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ble Apex Court in the case of GKN Driveshafts (supra) had held that the reassessment order to be non sustainable when the objections to the re-assessment were not disposed off by the AO. Similar view was taken by the Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of KSS Petron Pvt. Ltd. (supra). 13. We further find that Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Trend Electronics (2015) 379 ITR 456 (Bom) after considering the decision of Hon ble Bombay High court in the case of CIT Vs. Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd (2012) 340 ITR 66 (Bom) has held that recorded reasons as laid down by the Apex Court must be furnished to the assessee when sought for so as to enable the assessee to object to the same before the AO. It has further held that the re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
