TMI Blog2021 (11) TMI 1115X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ugned assessment orders. It is the case where there is slight irregularity in the proceedings carried out by the respondent in as much as the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd[ 2002 (11) TMI 7 - SUPREME COURT] was not followed. Though the requirement for giving a speaking order is pursuant to the aforesaid decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd reported in 259 ITR 119 (SC), is doubtful in the light of the change in the method of assessment under the e-assessment. Nevertheless, assessment ought not to have been carried out in a mechanical manner. Though the petitioners have also not replied to the show cause notices, the fact remains that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment under Section 143(3) r/w Section 147 of Income Tax Act, 1961 and has thereafter, proceeded to pass the impugned order in violation of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd reported in 259 ITR 119 (SC). 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the dispute relates to the sale of land and the claim of long term capital gain under the provisions of the Income Tax Act and was subject matter of scrutiny assessment in the year 2014 and assessment orders dated 03.04.2014 were passed by the Assessing Officer under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act. 5. The case of the petitioners is that both the petitioners i.e., husband and wife had entered into a Joint Development Agreement (JDA) w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Dayanidhi Maran vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax in W.P.Nos.3405 and 43944 of 2016 vide order dated 10.10.2018. It is further submitted that the entire procedure followed by the respondent while passing the impugned assessment order was irregular and contrary to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd reported in 259 ITR 119 (SC) and also without considering the objection as to why the assessment cannot be revised in terms of the reasons given for reopening the assessment. The learned counsel for the petitioners therefore submits that the impugned orders are liable to be quashed. 8. Appearing on behalf of the respon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 39;ble Supreme Court in the case of GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd reported in 259 ITR 119 (SC). The learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent would therefore submit that the Writ Petitions are liable to be dismissed. 11. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondent. Perused the notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1960 and the reasons given for reopening of the assessment on 28.10.2019 and the subsequent communications which culminated in the issuance of the show cause notices and the disposal of the proceedings vide impugned assessment orders dated 30.12.2019. 12. It is the case where there is slight irregularity in the proceedings carried ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
