Pannalal Madan Bai v. ACIT (2022) 448 ITR 298 /(2023) 333 CTR 329/ 226 DTR 217 (Mad.)(HC) Pannalal Kochar v. ACIT (2022) 448 ITR 298 /(2023) 333 CTR 329/ 226 DTR 217(Mad.)(HC) Editorial : Decision of single judge in Pannalal Kochar v. ACIT (2022) 19 ITR-OL 606 //(2023) 333 CTR 333(Mad)(HC)/), Pannalal Madan Bai v. ACIT Pannalal Madan Bai v. ACIT (2023 ) 333 CTR 333 (Mad)( HC) affirmed., affirmed.

S. 148 : Reassessment-Notice-Law laid down by Supreme Court not followed-Matter remanded to Assessing Officer. [S. 147, Art. 226]

On appeal against the order on a writ petition remanding the matter to the Assessing Officer and failure to consider the objections raised by the assessee to reopen the assessment under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 held that the court had in the writ petition after hearing the parties and upon examining the documents produced was of the view that there was procedural irregularity by the Assessing Officer and the guidelines framed in GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. v. ITO(2003) 259 ITR 19 (SC) were not followed, while conducting the reassessment proceedings and therefore, had set aside the reassessment order and had remanded the matter to the Assessing Officer to pass orders afresh, after complying with the required procedure as laid down under the law. There was no infirmity or illegality in the order warranting interference. Liberty was granted to the assessee to file additional objections, if any. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer was to consider each and every point raised in the earlier objections and also the additional objections, if any, to be filed by the assessees and pass orders afresh, after following the procedure as laid down in GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. v. ITO. (AY.2012-13)