Subscribe To Our Free Newsletter:

Ujagar Holdings Pvt. Ltd vs. ITO (ITAT Delhi)

COURT:
CORAM: ,
SECTION(S): ,
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS: ,
COUNSEL: ,
DATE: May 16, 2016 (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: May 28, 2016 (Date of publication)
AY: 2006-07
FILE: Click here to download the file in pdf format
CITATION:
S. 147: Non-furnishing by the AO of reasons recorded for reopening the assessment results in violation of the law laid down in GKN Driveshaft 259 ITR 19 (SC) & renders the reopening void

Despite repeated letters requesting to provide copy of the reasons recorded or the grounds on which the assessment was reopened, no such reasons were provided to the assessee. We find that the DR could not substantiate whether any reasons were provided by the Assessing Officer to the assessee and merely relying on the fact that general practice was followed in Department of supplying reasons, it cannot be presumed that reasons were supplied in the case of the assessee. On the other hand, the assessee has filed evidences in support of its claim of request for providing grounds of initiation of the reassessment proceedings in almost every submission made before the Assessing Officer. Therefore, in our considered view, the Assessing Officer has not complied with the direction of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of GKN Driveshaft (India) limited Vs. CIT (2003) 259 ITR 19 (SC) providing reasons for reassessment within a reasonable time, and therefore respectfully following the decisions cited above, the reassessment completed by the Assessing Officer under section 147 of the Act cannot be sustained in the case of the assessee and quashed.

((i) Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Vijay Sanchar Nigam Ltd. (2012) 21 taxmann.com 53 (Bombay),

(ii) Judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka dated 14/08/2015 in the case of Kothari Metals vs. ITO in Writ Appeal No. 218/2015,

(iii) Tata International Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (2012) 23 taxmann.com 18 (Mum) and

(iv) Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Trend Electronics (2015) 61 taxmann.com 308 (Bombay) followed.)

Posted in All Judgements, Tribunal
One comment on “Ujagar Holdings Pvt. Ltd vs. ITO (ITAT Delhi)
  1. sorry disgusting revenue officers, what kind of AOs and what kind of dept of revenue we have, if we discharge them from service the country ‘s economy may improve by slow steps soon there after.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

Top