Income Tax

Non mentioning reasons recorded in assessment order proved it was framed in haste – ITAT

Non mentioning reasons recorded for reopening in the assessment order proved that assessment was framed in haste without providing adequate opportunity – ITAT

ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
ABCAUS 2768 (2019) (02) ITAT

The appellant assessee had sought to set aside the impugned order passed by CIT(A) confirming the penalty order passed u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act).

In the instant case, the assessment was framed under section 144/147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) by issuing of the notice u/s 148 of the Act.

Further, notices u/s 142(1) were also issued and served but, on failure of the assessee to appear before the Assessing Officer (AO), he proceeded to make the addition on account of cash deposit in the saving bank account.

The CIT (Appeals) dismissed the appeal in limine on the ground that the contention of the assessee that he had not received any notice by the AO, was not sustainable because all the notices were sent to him on the same address on which order u/s 271(1)(c) was served.

Feeling aggrieved, the assessee went to the Tribunal.

The Tribunal observed that from the assessment order, it was not clear as to what were the reasons, if at all recorded by the AO, for reopening the assessment.

Further, the Tribunal observed that the assessment order had been framed u/s 147 of the Act was discernible only from the fact that the AO stated to have issued the notice u/s 148 of the Act.

The Tribunal opined that the fact that reasons recorded had not been mentioned in the assessment order nor in the order passed by the CIT (A) proved that the assessment was framed in haste without providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

The Tribunal observed that even the CIT (A) had not provided adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee rather relied upon unsubstantiated fact that when order u/s 271(1)(c) was received by the assessee, he could not be believed that the notice u/s 148 of the Act and notices sent u/s 142 (1) have not been received by the assessee.

In order to meet with the ends of justice, the assessment order passed by the AO and impugned order passed by the CIT (A) was set aside and the case remanded back to the AO to decide afresh after providing an opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

 Download Full Judgment Click Here >>

Share

Recent Posts

  • Income Tax

Validity of consolidated approval u/s 153D-ITAT Allahabad follows earlier decision over later one

ITAT Allahabad follows it previous decision on validity of consolidated approval u/s 153D, says it’s later decision was in violation…

9 hours ago
  • Income Tax

Purchase made by E-way bill cannot be treated as bogus or non genuine – ITAT

Wherever assessee had purchased the materials by way of E-way bill such purchases cannot be treated as bogus or non…

23 hours ago
  • bankruptcy

Mere defective affidavit with IBC application not render application non est – SC

Mere filing a defective affidavit with IBC application not render the application non est and liable to be rejected In…

1 day ago
  • Government

CRCs invites application for Young Professionals (Finance) from CA/CMA/CS

Engagement of two Young Professionals (Finance) in the office of Central Registrar of Cooperative Society on contractual basis. The office…

1 day ago
  • Government

Ministry of Civil Aviation hiring Young Professionals for Domestic Transport Division

Ministry of Civil Aviation hiring two Young Professionals for the Domestic Transport Division Invitation of applications for engagement of two…

1 day ago
  • Income Tax

Relying on investigation report without own reasons recorded is borrowed satisfaction u/s 148

Relying upon investigation report without own reasons recorded amounted to borrowed satisfaction u/s 148 which is not permissible In a…

2 days ago