The assesseee was minor during the relevant previous year. The assessment was reopened and assessment was completed under section 144 of the Act. On appeal the CIT(A) confirmed the addition. On appeal the appellant contended that the Assessing Officer recorded the reasons merely on the basis of figures recorded in the Form 26AS without any verification or examination of the same. Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer has not applied the mind whether provision of 64(IA) is applicable to the facts of the appellant and the sanction was given mechanically. Accordingly the reassessment notice and proceedings were quashed. (AY. 2010-11)
Apoorva Sharma v. ITO (2022) 218 TTJ 959/ 216 DTR 300 (Jaipur)(Trib)
S. 148 : Reassessment-Notice-Minor-Form No 26AS-No reasons were recorded by the Assessing Officer Ward 6(3), who has issued the notice-Notice was not issued by the Jurisdictional officer-Objection was not raised in the course of assessment proceedings-After participating in the assessment proceedings and completion of assessment the jurisdictional issue cannot be raised-Non application of mind by the sanctioning Authority-Reassessment was quashed. [S. 4, 5, 64(IA), 124(3), 133(6), 147, 151, Contract Act, 1872, S. 11]