TMI Blog2021 (8) TMI 1156X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has been no omission or failure as mentioned above on the part of assessee, the ITO has in consequence of information in his possession reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for any assessment year. The records regarding filing of ITR is accessible on line as refund granted to the assessee for the assessment year under review, without information of ITR filed by him clearly indicated in Form No. 26AS, copy of which is enclosed, had the A.O. taken due care to verify the facts before reaching to the above reasons, there could have been not valid reasons for reopening the case u/s 147/148 - unless the requirement of clause (a) and (b) of Section 147 are satisfied, the ITO has no jurisdiction to issue a notic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... available with the department, hence, the reassessment proceedings and resultant assessment order passed u/s. 148 is invalid ab initio and need to be quashed in toto for the sake of justice. 3. The reassessment proceedings were undertaken and initiated without application of mind by the ld. AO, hence the same are highly unjustified and are not tenable in law hence the resultant assessment order needs to be quashed in entirely. 4. The ld. AO is not justified in passing assessment order without serving a proper and valid notice u/s. 147 of the Act to the assessee. 5. The ld. CIT(A) has erred in law in not quashing the unlawful reassessment order passed by the ld. AO u/s. 148/144 despite having accepted the fact in his appellat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ling situation of Covid-19 Pandemic. 3. In this appeal, the assessee has raised additional ground which is against initiation of reassessment proceedings U/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act). The assessee in his prayer has stated that this is a legal ground and these were inadvertently missed/skipped to be raised before the ld. CIT(A), therefore, prayed to admit additional grounds of appeal. 4. On the contrary, the ld. DR has objected to the prayer for admission of additional grounds. 5. From perusal of the record, we observed that the A.O. had issued notice U/s 148 of the Act and reassessment proceedings were initiated and the ld. AR has also argued that the A.O. has initiated the proceedings on the basis of non ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the assessee had complied with all the provisions of the Income tax as applicable to him for assessment year 2008-09 as below: i. Obtained the audit report in terms of section 44AB of the IT Act, 1961 within prescribed time limit. i. Filed his ITR iii. ITR was processed and refund was granted as reflected in 26AS. iv. The ld. CIT(A) accepts in his order that the Assessee filed his ITR that is confirmed from form 26AS showing processing of the said ITR and granting of refund on 9.11.2009. v. The CIT(A) also found that the assessee had obtained the Tax Audit Report within prescribed time limit, and accordingly deleted the penalty levied by the Ld. AO u/s. 271B of the Act. 2. Thus the reasons recorded by the Ld. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mstances of the case, when the AO has initiated the proceedings on the basis of non-existent and factually incorrect facts and reasons without application of mind and without verification of the facts available on record, then the proceedings initiated under Section 147/148 are not sustainable in law. The same are set aside and consequential reassessment order is quashed. 4. The assessee was not served any notice sent by post as per the assessment order u/s. 148, 142(1) and section 144 etc., before completion of the reassessment proceedings u/s. 144/148 of that act, serving of notice u/s. 144 is mandatory before completion of the order under that section, failure of that renders the assessment order also invalid ab initio. The ground ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... anted by the department which is duly posted in 26AS by the department. However, despite that it is the factual position, the present proceedings were initiated on the reasons that the assessee did not file his ITR. The assessee has also relied upon the decision/judgment of Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of CIT Vs Shree Rajasthan Syntax Ltd. (2008) 313 ITR 231 (Raj) on the point that the A.O. had issued notice in a mechanical manner without verifying the correctness of the information received by him. 12. Apparently, the A.O. has failed to discharge the obligation cast upon him by the Statute by verifying the correctness of the information before initiating the proceedings. 13. Before issuing a notice U/s 148 of the Act, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
