TMI Blog2022 (8) TMI 575X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the case of Pr. CIT Vs.Jagat Talkies Distributors [ 2017 (9) TMI 192 - DELHI HIGH COURT] . In its aforesaid order, the Hon ble High Court relying on the judgment of the Hon ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT Vs. Trend Electronics, [ 2015 (9) TMI 1119 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] had held, that on account of the failure of the A.O to make available to the assessee a copy of the reasons for reopening of the assessment u/s.147 of the Act, the re-assessment proceedings would stand vitiated in law. Accordingly, as in the case before us, the A.O despite specific request of the assessee had failed to provide to him the copy of the reasons to believe on the basis of which his case was reopened u/s.147 therefore, as per the aforesaid settled position of law the assessment framed by the him being devoid and bereft of valid assumption of jurisdiction cannot be sustained and is herein quashed. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA Nos. 22 & 23/RPR/2017 And ITA No.183/RPR/2017 - - - Dated:- 4-8-2022 - Shri Ravish Sood, Judicial Member And Shri Arun Khodpia, Accountant Member For the Assessee : Smt. Richa Khatri, CA For the Revenue : Shri G.N Singh, Sr. DR ORDER PE ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y to law particularly when reference to DVO was held by the same Learned CIT(Appeals) as contrary to law. 6. With due respects and without prejudice to Grounds No. 1 to 5 (supra), since the Learned CIT(Appeals) had categorically held that reference to the DVO without rejecting the books of account was contrary to law, his placing reliance on the estimated report of the registered valuer without first detecting any suppression in investment recorded in the books of account and ultimately sustaining addition of Rs.487209 (458860+28169) again based on pure estimations of the Learned CIT(Appeals), are contrary to facts and law. 7. That the Learned CIT(Appeals) erred both on facts and in law in sustaining estimated addition of Rs.487209 without bringing any corroborative evidence on record to substantiate such estimation and without giving justification for ignoring the investment recorded in the books of account. 8. The appellant craves leave to add and/or alter, amend or withdraw any ground/s before or at the time of hearing of this appeal. 3. Survey proceedings u/s.133A of the Act were conducted on the assessee on 03.03.2011. Subsequently, the case of the assessee was reo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rsy involved in the present appeal lies in a narrow compass, i.e., sustainability of the assessment framed by the A.O without making available a copy of the reasons to believe to the assessee who after duly complying with the notice u/s 148 of the Act is stated to have specifically requested for the same. Before us, it is the claim of the Ld. AR that the assessee had vide a letter dated 30.10.2012, inter alia, requested the A.O to make available a copy of the reasons to believe on the basis of which his case was reopened u/s.147 of the Act. In order to fortify his aforesaid claim the Ld. AR had taken us through the aforesaid letter dated 30.10.2012 (supra), on the basis of which the assessee had requested for a copy of reasons to believe , Page 32 of APB, which reads as under: To, The Income Tax Officer Date :30.10.2012 Ward-1(1), Bilaspur (C.G.) Assessee : Shri Brijmohan Narang C. G. Plaza, Bilaspur. Reference : Your notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 For assessment year 2009-10 Subject : COMPLIANCE Dear Sir, 1. The assessee has already filed the Return of income a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the A.O to make available to the assessee a copy of the reasons to believe which formed the basis for reopening of his case goes to the very root of the validity of jurisdiction that was assumed by him for framing the impugned assessment. We, say so, for the reason that as the assessee despite specific request for a copy of the reasons to believe was not provided with the same by the A.O, thus, he remained divested of his statutory right of objecting to the very basis on which his case was reopened under section 147 of the Act. As stated by the Ld. AR, and rightly so, as held by the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. Vs. ITO Ors. (2003) 259 ITR 19 (SC), the assessee after obtaining a copy of the reasons to believe is vested with a statutory right to file his objections before the A.O, which the latter is required to dispose off on the basis of a speaking order. As in the case before us there has been a complete violation of the applicable principle of law by the A.O, who had despite specific request by the assessee failed to communicate the reasons to believe that had formed the very basis for reopening of his assessment u/s.147 of the Ac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e High Court of Delhi in the case of Pr. CIT Vs.Jagat Talkies Distributors (2017) 85 taxmann.com 189 (Del.). In its aforesaid order, the Hon ble High Court relying on the judgment of the Hon ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT Vs. Trend Electronics, ITA No.1867 of 2013, had held, that on account of the failure of the A.O to make available to the assessee a copy of the reasons for reopening of the assessment u/s.147 of the Act, the re-assessment proceedings would stand vitiated in law. Accordingly, as in the case before us, the A.O despite specific request of the assessee had failed to provide to him the copy of the reasons to believe on the basis of which his case was reopened u/s.147 of the Act, therefore, as per the aforesaid settled position of law the assessment framed by the him being devoid and bereft of valid assumption of jurisdiction cannot be sustained and is herein quashed. 12. As we have quashed the assessment for want of valid assumption of jurisdiction by the A.O u/s.147 of the Act, therefore, we refrain from adverting to and therein adjudicating the grounds on the basis of which the assessee has assailed the addition made in his case on merits which, thus, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
