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 >>

----------- Similar Posts: -----------
Share

Recent Posts

  • Income Tax

Addition u/s 68 deleted as AO failed to find any discrepancy in details submitted

Addition u/s 68 deleted as AO failed to find any discrepancy in details of creditors submitted by the assessee In…

1 hour ago
  • Empanelment

Jharkhand Rajya Gramin Bank-Empanelment of retired officers as Concurrent auditors

Jharkhand Rajya Gramin Bank - Empanelment of retired officers of banks as Concurrent auditors on contract basis Jharkhand Rajya Gramin…

2 hours ago
  • Income Tax

Book Profit u/s 115JB can not be computed as per cash basis of accounting

Book Profit u/s 115JB to be computed as per Profit & Loss Account prepared under Schedule III of the Companies…

4 hours ago
  • Income Tax

Order not in conformity of Faceless Assessment Scheme if not est? – ITAT remands case

Order not in conformity of Faceless Assessment Scheme 2019 if not est? - ITAT remands the case in view of…

2 days ago
  • FCRA

Extension of the validity of FCRA registration certificates till 30.09.2024

Extension of the validity of FCRA registration certificates till 30.09.2024 Home Ministry has decided to extend the validity of FCRA…

2 days ago
  • Income Tax

Section 68 to 69B applicable only if assessee is required to maintain books of accounts

Provisions of section 68 to 69B applicable only if assessee is required to maintain books of accounts under provisions of…

3 days ago