ITEM NO.6 VIRTUAL COURT NO.1 SECTION IX<\/p>\n
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
\n RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS<\/p>\n
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) Diary No.7367\/2020<\/p>\n
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 21-08-2019
\n in WP No.1917\/2019 passed by the High Court Of Judicature At
\n Bombay)<\/p>\n
THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
\n OF INCOME TAX 12(3)(2) & ORS. Petitioner(s)<\/p>\n
VERSUS<\/p>\n
MARICO LTD. Respondent(s)<\/p>\n
(FOR ADMISSION and I.R.; and, IA No.39392\/2020 \u2013 FOR CONDONATION OF
\n DELAY IN FILING)<\/p>\n
Date : 01-06-2020 This petition was called on for hearing today.<\/p>\n
CORAM :
\n HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT
\n HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR
\n HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEET SARAN<\/p>\n
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Sanjay Jain, ASG
\n Mr. S.K. Singhania, Adv.
\n Ms. Gargi Khanna, Adv.
\n Mrs. Anil Katiyar, AOR<\/p>\n
For Respondent(s) Mr. Arvind Datar, Sr. Adv.
\n Mr. Mahesh Agarwal, Adv.
\n Mr. M.S. Ananth, Adv.
\n Mr. Anshuman Srivastava, Adv.
\n Mr. E.C. Agrawala, AOR<\/p>\n
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
\n O R D E R
\nDelay condoned.<\/p>\n
In the present matter, the assessment order was passed on Signature Not Verified 30.01.2018 as regards the Assessment Year 2014-15. <\/p>\n
According to the record, certain queries were raised by the Assessing Officer on 25.09.2017 during the assessment proceedings which were responded to by the Assessee vide letters dated 10.10.2017 and 21.12.2017.<\/p>\n
After considering said responses, the assessment order was passed on 30.01.2018.<\/p>\n
Subsequently, by notice dated 27.03.2019 issued under Section 148 of the Income-Tax Act, the matter was sought to be re-opened. While accepting the challenge to the issuance of notice, the High Court in para 12 of its judgment observed as under:<\/p>\n
\u201c12. Thus we find that the reasons in support of the impugned notice is the very issue in respect of which the Assessing Officer has raised the query dated 25 September 2017 during the assessment proceedings and the Petitioner had responded to the same by its letters dated 10 December 2017 and 21 December 2017 justifying its stand. In the circumstances, we see no reason to interfere in the matter. This special leave petition is, accordingly, dismissed. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.<\/p>\n (MUKESH NASA) (PRADEEP KUMAR) The non-rejection of the explanation in the Assessment Order would amount to the Assessing Officer accepting the view of the assessee, thus taking a view\/forming an opinion. Therefore, in these circumstances, the reasons in support of the impugned notice proceed on a mere change of opinion and therefore would be completely without jurisdiction in the present facts<\/p>\n
\nThe non-rejection of the explanation in the Assessment Order would amount to the Assessing Officer accepting the view of the assessee, thus taking a view\/forming an opinion. Therefore, in these circumstances, the reasons in support of the impugned notice proceed on a mere change of opinion and therefore would be completely without jurisdiction in the present facts. Accordingly, the impugned notice dated 27 March 2019 is quashed and set-aside.<\/em>\u201d <\/p>\n
\n COURT MASTER BRANCH OFFICER<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"