Kamal Kumar Godara, Faridabad V. ITO WARD - 1(3), Faridabad

ITA 1459/DEL/2020

AI Insights

The case involves appeals filed by Kamal Kumar Godara against the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Faridabad, which arose from the reassessment orders passed by the Assessing Officer under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment years 2008-09 and 2009-10. The primary contention of the assessee was the lack of jurisdiction assumed under Section 147 due to non-compliance with the prerequisites of the section, specifically the non-disposal of objections raised against the reassessment proceedings. The Tribunal noted the procedural irregularity in not addressing the objections and decided to remand the matter back to the Assessing Officer to address the objections and reframe the reassessment order accordingly.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 121580 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 8 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-04-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 18-04-2023
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 04-08-2020
• Other Referred Cases: G K N Driveshaft (I) Ltd. vs. ITO, Home Finders Housing Ltd. vs. ITO
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 147; 148; 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “C” DELHI BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.As No.1458 & 1459/DEL/2020 Assessment Years 2008-09 & 2009-10 Kamal Kumar Godara, 709/2, Kohli Mohalla, Village Mujesar, Faridabad. v. ITO, Ward-1(3), Faridabad. TAN/PAN: AALPG7083L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Alok Kumar Gupta, CA Respondent by: Shri Anuj Garg, Sr.DR Date of hearing: 19 04 2023 Date of pronouncement: 19 04 2023 O R D E R PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, A.M.: T he c apti oned appea ls hav e b ee n file d by the Ass essee agains t t he orders of t he C ommi ss io ner of Income Tax (A ppeals ), Far idaba d ( ‘C IT (A ) ’ i n s hort ) both dated 11. 02. 2020 ar isi ng fro m the a ssess me nt orders bot h da ted 29. 03. 2016 pass ed b y the A ssessi ng O ff ice r (A O ) u nder Se ct io n 143(3) r. w . section 147 of the Inc ome T ax A ct, 1 961 (t he A ct ) conce rn ing A Y s 200 8-09 a nd 2009-10 res pec ti ve l y. 2. I n both the ca pt ioned a pp ea ls, the assessee has chall enged the ac ti on o f t he Assessing O fficer on merits of t he a dditi ons as w ell as l ac k of j ur isd ic tio n ass ume d unde r Sec tion 147 of t he A ct due to non c omp li a nce of pre- re quisit es of Sectio n 147 o f the A ct. I.T.A No.1458 &1459/Del/2020 2 3. When the matter w as calle d fo r hearin g, the ld. couns el for the as sesse e at t he outse t submi tt ed th at the assessee had int er ali a ra ise d obj ec tion to the p rocee di ngs initi ate d un de r Sect ion 147 of the Act a nd iss uance o f notice under Secti on 148 of the A ct both vi de lett er dated 22. 0 6. 2015 fo r As sess ment Y ears 200 8-09 a nd 2009-10. T he Asse ssin g O ffic er how eve r has omi t te d to take note of the objecti ons r aise d a nd c omp le t ed the re-ass essment wit hout meet ing th e require ment of di sposing of the obj ection a nd inti mat ion t he re to to the assess ee. The C IT (A ) in the first a ppeal has als o ign ore d t he cont en ti ons of the ass esse e in t his regar d. It w as thus cont ende d t ha t a s a co nseq uen ce of non disposal of the obj ecti ons so ra is ed, the valua ble right of the assess ee to seek legal re med y w as denied. It w as t hus c ontended t hat the re - assess me nt orde r in ques tion passed in in fri ng ement of re qui re me nt of l a w is bad i n law a nd t hus nulli ty in the light of the j udgmen t of t he Hon’bl e S up re me Co urt in G K N D riveshaf t ( I) Ltd. vs. ITO , (2003 ) 259 ITR 19 ( SC ). 4. T he l d. D R for the Revenue, o n the ot her han d, submit te d that the mat ter may be resto re d to the file of the A ssess ing Of fice r for d isp osal of t he obj ec ti on as pe r th e proce dure lai d down b y the H on’b le Supre me Co urt in G KN Drives ha ft (I) L td. (supra ) and to cu re the pr oce du ral i rregu la rit y crept i n t he re as sessement proceed ings. 5. We have heard t he rival submissi ons and pe ruse d the o rders of Re ve nue Authorit ies. 6. T he Hon ’ble Supre me Court di s misse d the SL P of th e assessee in t he c ase of H om e Fi nders Housi ng Lt d. vs. ITO (2018) 94 T axm ann.com 84 (SC ) agai nst the j ud gment of t he H on’ble I.T.A No.1458 &1459/Del/2020 3 Madras H ig h C ourt re nde re d i n t he c ase of H om e F inders Hous i ng Ltd. vs. (2018) 93 taxm ann. com (Madras ). T he H on’ ble Madr as H igh C our t had he ld that non dispos al of obje ction rai sed b y th e assessee i s a pro cedur al i rregu la ri ty for vi olat ion of a procedural safeg uard and th us w ill n ot re nde r th e re- assess me nt or der no nest per se. In co ns onance w i th judgment s o r en dered, we deem it exped ie nt to res tore t he ma tt e r back to t he fi le of t he Assessi ng O fficer f or deal i ng w i th objecti ons rais ed o n be half of the assessee an d pass a spe akin g orde r t hereon. T he A sses sin g O f fice r sha ll re fra me the re-as sess ment ord er de nov o ha ving re ga rd to th e obj ecti ons s o raised and mee ti ng o th er at tendan t requ ir ements, i f an y, in accor da nce w ith law. 7. In th is view of the matter, w e do not con sider it n ecess a ry to delve i nto oth er l e gal a nd factual objections r ais ed b y the assess ee as per its grounds of appea l at t his sta ge. It sha ll be open to the assessee to ra ise a ll s uch legal and fact ua l obje ctions befo re the A ssessi ng O ff ice r in the re-assess me nt proc ee di ngs. T he order of the C IT (A ) is t hus set a side an d th e procee di ngs a re res tored to the file of the A ssessi ng O ffic er for fresh deter mina ti on of assessed income in accor da nce w ith law a ft er givi ng prope r opportunit y to the assesse e. 8. In the res ul t, bo th the appea ls o f the assesse e a re all ow ed f or sta tis ti ca l purpos es . Order pronounced in the open Court on 19/04/2023. Sd/- Sd/- [KUL BHARAT] [PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: /04/2023