Income Tax

AO not required to adjudicate oral objection on reopening of assessment u/s 148-ITAT

AO not required to adjudicate oral objection on reopening of assessment u/s 148 in the absence of any specific objection made in writing-ITAT

ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
ABCAUS 2278 (2018) (04) ITAT

In the instant case, the appeal was preferred by the assessee against the order of the CIT(Appeals) confirming the additions made.

During the course of hearing before the Tribunal, the assessee moved an application for admission of the additional ground stating that the reassessment order under section 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act) was made by the AO without disposing the objections to the reopening by passing a speaking order and hence the order was bad in law as the conditions stipulated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court were not been adhered.

It was prayed that the impugned order was required to be set aside as non est on the facts and circumstances of the case.

The ITAT observed that the additional ground was related to the non-disposal of the objections raised by the assessee against the reopening of the assessment by the AO.

The Tribunal found that the assessee had never raised any objection in writing before the AO which required proper adjudication. In the absence of any specific objection in writing, the AO was not required to adjudicate any such type of objection, if raised orally.

Also, the ITAT observed that admission of the ground required verification of facts. The ground was not raised either before the CIT(Appeals) or before the Tribunal while filing the appeal.

The Tribunal, under these circumstances, found no merit in the admission of this additional ground and rejected the same.

Download Full Judgment Click Here >>

Share

Recent Posts

  • Government

Temporarily blocking public access to Telegram App not disproportionate – Delhi High Court

Temporarily blocking public access to Telegram App under section 69A of IT Act 2000 is not disproportionate - Delhi HC…

20 hours ago
  • Income Tax

High Court explains the meaning of term ‘enterprise’ appearing in section 80IA

High Court explains the meaning of term ‘enterprise’ appearing in section 80IA to means a project or an undertaking owned…

22 hours ago
  • Income Tax

Addition deleted as assessee was only a carrier of cash not owner who came up to own it

Addition deleted as assessee was only a carrier of cash and the real owner had come forward owning the cash…

3 days ago
  • RTI

Lokayukta Police not exempt from disclosure of information under RTI Act 2005 – SC

Lokayukta Police not an ‘intelligence and security’ organisation  and hence not exempt from disclosure of information under RTI Act 2005…

5 days ago
  • Income Tax

Payment of imprest whether a transfer within the meaning of section 269ST

Payment of imprest whether a transfer within the meaning of section 269ST – case remanded for determination In a recent…

1 week ago
  • ICAI

CA Misconduct – Order quashed as judgment not passed by same members who heard arguments.

CA Misconduct – Appellate order quashed as final judgment was not passed by same members who heard arguments. In a…

1 week ago