NATIONAL STANDARD INDIA LTD, MUMBAI V. DCIT CEN CIR 7(3), MUMBAI

ITA 2873/MUM/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9035 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 7 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-01-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 13-05-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Search and seizure; Non compliance; Assessment record; Reason to believe
• Section: 143(3); 153A; 48; 13; 147; 148

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO . 2873 / MUM . /201 5 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 11 12 ) NATIONAL STANDARD INDIA LTD. 412, 4 TH FLOOR,17G, V ARDHAMAN CHAMBER CAWASJI PATEL ROAD, HORNIMAN CIRCLE FORT, MUMBAI 400 001 PAN AAACN9808L . APPELLANT V/S DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE (7)3 , MUMBAI [ERSTWHILE CENTRAL CIRCLE 42, MUMBAI] . RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : SHRI VIJAY MEHTA REVENUE BY : SHRI AJAY KUMAR DATE OF HEARING 11 . 10 .2019 DATE OF ORDER 08.01.2020 O R D E R PER SAKTIJIT DEY, J.M . T HE CAPTIONED APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGING THE ORDER DATED 23 RD MARCH 2015 , PASSED BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) 48 , MUMBAI, PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSMENT Y EAR 20 11 12 . 2. IN GROUNDS NO.1, 2 AND 3, THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED THE VALIDITY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PURPORTEDLY PASSED UNDER SECTION 2 NATIONAL STANDARD INDIA LTD. 153A R/W SECTION 153C / 143(3) AND UNDE R SECTION 148 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (FOR SHORT 'THE ACT' ). IN ADDITION, THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONAL GROUNDS: I) THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE RE ASSESSMENT ORDER WITHOUT APPRECIATING THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT PROVIDE REASON RECORDED FOR RE OPENING THE ASSESSMENT IN SPITE OF SPECIFIC REQUEST MADE BY THE APPELLANT. II) ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LEARNED CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE HELD THAT THE LOSS OF ` 5,29,98,616, INCURRED BY T H E APPELLANT DUE TO ASSIGNMENT OF LOAN IS LONG TERM CAPITAL LOSS. 3. AS COULD BE SEEN FROM THE ADDITIONAL GROUND NO.1, IT IS AN OFF SHOOT OF GROUNDS NO.1 AND 2, OF THE MAIN GROUND S AND THE ISSUE RAISED IN THE SAID ADDITIONAL GROUND IS ANCILLARY AND INCIDENTAL TO THE AFORESAID MAIN GROUND S . WHEREAS , THE ADDITIONAL GROUND NO.2, IS ON THE ISSUE OF CHARACTER OF LOSS OF ` 5,29,98,616, WHETHER, IS LONG TERM CAPITAL LOSS OR NOT. 4. SINCE , THE ISSUES RAISED IN THE ADDITIONAL GROUND S DO NOT REQUIRE INVESTIGATION INTO FRESH FACTS AND CAN BE DECIDED ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD, WE ARE INCLINED TO ADMIT THE ADDITIONAL GROUND S FOR ADJUDICATION. AT THE OUTSET, WE PROPOSE TO DEAL WITH THE LEGAL ISSUE RAISED IN THE GROUNDS N O.1, 2 AND 3, OF THE MAIN GROUND S AS WELL AS ADDITIONAL GROUND NO.1. 3 NATIONAL STANDARD INDIA LTD. 5. BRIEF FACTS ARE, THE ASSESSEE IS A RESIDENT COMPANY AND IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF BUILDER AND DEVELOPER. A SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERATION UNDER SECTION 132(1) OF THE ACT WAS CONDUCTED IN THE CASE OF LODHA GROUP ON 10 TH JANUARY 2011. FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER DISPUTE, THE ASSESSEE FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME ON 29 TH SEPTEMBER 2011, DECLARING LOSS OF ` 6,85,53,400. ON THE BASIS OF INFORMATION RECEIVED DURING THE SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPER ATION IN CASE OF LODHA GROUP , TO WHICH THE ASSESSEE IS CONNECTED, THE ASSESSING OFFICER CALLED UPON THE ASSESSEE TO FURNISH VARIOUS INFORMATION AND DETAILS . A FTER EXAMINING THE DETAILS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE ADDITIONS ON ACCO UNT OF AMOUNT OF ADVANCE / LOSS WRITTEN OFF , MARKETING EXPENSE CAPITALIZED , UNDISCLOSED INCOME ON ACCOUNT OF SALE OF CAR PARKING AND ON ACCOUNT OF ON MONEY , WHICH , RESULTED IN DETERMINATION OF NET INCOME AT ` 1,18,85,129. AGAINST THE ASSESSMENT ORDER SO PA SSED, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, INTER ALIA, ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 153A R/W SECTION 153C OF THE ACT IS INVALID. FURTHER, IT ALSO CHALLENGED THE ISSUANCE OF NOTICE UNDER SECT ION 148 OF THE ACT AND COMPLETION OF ASSESSMENT IN PURSUANCE THERETO WITHOUT SUPPLYING THE REASONS RECORDED FOR RE OPENING OF ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 147 OF THE ACT. WHILE DEALING WITH ASSESSEES CONTENTION THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER COULD NOT HAVE PASSED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER 4 NATIONAL STANDARD INDIA LTD. UNDER SECTION 153 A R/W S ECTION153C OF THE ACT WITHOUT ISSUING ANY NOTICE UNDER SECTION 153C OF THE ACT, LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) HELD THAT THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEAR BEING THE YEAR OF SEARCH, THE ASSESSMENT ORDER CANNOT BE CON STRUED TO HAVE BEEN PASSED UNDER SECTION 153C OF THE ACT. WHILE COMING TO THE SAID CONCLUSION, LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) ALSO OBSERVED THAT NO NOTICE UNDER SECTION 53C OF THE ACT WAS EVER ISSUED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEA R. HOWEVER, HE APPROVED THE ASSESSING OFFICERS ACTION IN ISSUING NOTICE U/ 148 OF THE ACT AND HELD THAT THE ASSESSMENT ORDER HAS NOT BEEN PASSED UNDER SECTION 153C OF THE ACT RATHER IT HAS BEEN PASSED UNDER SECTION 147 OF THE ACT. HE OBSERVED , MENTIONING OF SECTION 153A R/W SECTION 153C OF THE ACT IN THE CAUSE TITLE OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER IS A MISTAKE COMMITTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THUS, ON THE AFORESAID BASIS, LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) DISMISSED THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE CH ALLENGING THE VALIDITY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. 6. THE LEARNED AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED , BEFORE INITIATION OF PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 147 AND ISSUANCE OF NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT RECORDED ANY REASON TO B ELIEVE FOR RE OPENING OF ASSESSMENT. HE SUBMITTED , THOUGH , IN THE C OURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THE ASSESSEE HAD 5 NATIONAL STANDARD INDIA LTD. SPECIFICALLY REQUESTED FOR SUPPLY OF REASONS RECORDED FOR RE OPENING OF ASSESSMENT, IT WAS NEVER SUPPLIED TO THE ASSESSEE BEFORE COMPLETION OF ASSESSMENT. HE SUBMITTED , EVEN TILL D ATE THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT SUPPLIED THE REASONS RECORDED FOR RE OPENING OF ASSESSMENT. HE SUBMITTED , PRIOR RECORDING OF REASON TO BELIEVE FOR RE OPENING OF ASSESSMENT IS A MANDATORY REQUIREMENT FOR RE OPENING OF ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 147 AND ISSUANCE OF NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT. WITHOUT RECORDING THE REASON TO BELIEVE , THE ASSESSING OFFICER CAN NEITHER RE OPEN THE ASSESSMENT NOR CAN ISSUE NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT. HE SUBMITTED , UNLESS T HE AFORESAID MANDATORY REQUIREMENT IS STRICTLY FOLLOWED , THE RE OPENING OF ASSESSMENT WOULD BECOME INVALID. HE SUBMITTED , NON SUPPLY OF REASONS TO THE ASSESSEE IN THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS HAS PREVENTED THE ASSESSEE FROM RAISING OBJECTION , THERE BY , VITIATING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED. 7. THE LEARNED AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED , AS IT TRANSPIRES FROM RECORD, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT RECORDED ANY REASON TO BELIEVE BEFORE RE OPENING OF ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 147 AND ISSUANCE OF NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT. HE SUBMITTED , THOUGH , THE AFORESAID ISSUE WAS SPECIFICALLY RAISED BEFORE LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), HE HAS FAILED TO RECORD ANY FINDING ON THAT. THUS, HE SUBMITTED , FOR THIS REASON ALONE, THE ASSESSMENT ORDER HAS TO 6 NATIONAL STANDARD INDIA LTD. BE D ECLARED AS NULL AND VOID. IN SUPPORT OF SUCH CONTENTION, THE LEARNED AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE RELIED UPON THE FOLLOWING DECISIONS: I) CIT V/S SHIV RATAN SONI (DECD.), [2005] 279 ITR 261 (RAJ.) AND II) PCIT V/S TATA SONS LTD., ITA NO.639/2017, DATED 19.08.2019 . 8. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE STRONGLY RELYING UPON THE OBSERVATIONS OF LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) SUBMITTED , THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAVING VALIDLY INITIATED THE PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 147 OF THE ACT, THE ASSESSMENT ORDER CANNOT BE HELD AS NULL AND VOID. HOWEVER, HE FAIRLY SUBMITTED THAT THERE IS NOTHING ON RECORD TO SUGGEST THAT EITHER THE REASON TO BELIEVE FO R RE OPENING OF ASSESSMENT ARE AVAILABLE IN DEPARTMENTAL RECORD OR A COPY OF THE SAME WAS SUPPLIED TO THE ASSESSEE DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. IN THIS CONTEXT, HE FURNISHED THE REPORT DATED 27 TH SEPTEMBER 2019, RECEIVED FROM THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (DCIT) , CENTRAL CIRCLE 3, MUMBAI. 9. WE HAVE CONSIDERED RIVAL SUBMISSIONS IN THE LIGHT OF THE DECISIONS RELIED UPON AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. ON A PERUSAL OF THE FACTS AND MATERIAL ON RECORD, IT IS EVIDENT , IN T HE BODY OF THE ASSESSME NT ORDER THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS CLEARLY MENTIONED THAT HE 7 NATIONAL STANDARD INDIA LTD. HAS PASSED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER UNDER SECTION 153A R/W SECTION 153C / 143(3) AND UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT. HOWEVER, WHEN THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGED THE VALIDITY OF THE ASSESSMENT BEFORE LEARNED C OMMISSIONER (APPEALS) BY CONTENDING THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT ISSUED ANY NOTICE UNDER SECTION 153C OF THE ACT, LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) RECORDED A CATEGORICAL FINDING OF THE FACT THAT NO NOTICE UNDER SECTION 153C OF THE ACT HAS BEEN ISSUED B Y THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEAR. HOWEVER, HE OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSMENT , IN ANY CASE , WAS NOT REQUIRED TO BE MADE UNDER SECTION 153C OF THE ACT. THEREFORE, HE UPHELD THE ISSUANCE OF NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT , THEREBY , HO LDING THAT THE ASSESSMENT ORDER HAS BE EN PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) READ WITH SECTION 147 OF THE ACT. WHILE DOING SO, LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), HOWEVER, DID NOT DEAL WITH THE SPECIFIC GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE RE GARDING NON SUPPLY OF REASONS REC ORDED FOR RE OPENING OF ASSESSMENT BEFORE COMPLETION OF THE ASSESSMENT. IN THE COURSE OF THE PRESENT PROCEEDING, THE BENCH HAD DIRECTED THE REVENUE TO OBTAIN A REPORT FROM THE ASSESSING OFFICE R INDICATING WHETHER THE REASON TO BELIEVE WAS RECORDED BEFORE R E OPENING OF ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 147 AS WELL AS ISSUANCE OF NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT AND WHETHER A COPY OF SUCH REASON WAS SUPPLIED TO THE ASSESSEE BEFORE COMPLETION OF THE ASSESSMENT. FURTHER, THE REVENUE WAS DIRECTED TO 8 NATIONAL STANDARD INDIA LTD. CLARIFY ITS POSITI ON REGARDING THE PROVISIONS UNDER WHICH THE ASSESSMENT ORDER HAS BEEN PASSED. IT IS RELEVANT TO OBSERVE , IN PURSUANCE TO THE DIRECTION OF THE BENCH, THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE FURNISHED A REPORT FROM THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCULE 7(3), MUMBAI, I.E ., ( THE ASSESSING OFFICER ) DATED 27 TH SEPTEMBER 2019, WHICH READS AS UNDER: NO. DCCC - 7(3)/MUM/NATIONAL STANDARD LTD/2019 - 20 DATED 27/09/201 TO, THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (DR) ITAT - 'B' BENCH MUMBAI SIR SUB: REPORT IN THE CASE OF NATIONAL STANDARD INDIA LTD. AY2O11 - 12 ITA NO. 2873/M/2015. REF; LETTER NO. CIT(DR)/ITAT - 10/B BENCH/2019 - 20 DATED 26/09/2019 ******** KINDLY REFER TO THE ABOVE. AS DIRECTED THE POINT WISE REPLY IS SUBMITTED AS UNDER 1. IT IS SEEN FROM THE ASSESSMENT RECORDS AVAILABLE THAT THE DEPARTMENT HAS NOT FILED APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 23/03/2015 OF THE CIT(A) - 48 HOLDING THAT THE ORDER WAS PASSED UNDER SECTION 147 OF I T ACT BY ISSUING NOTICE U/S 148 OF I T ACT 1961. 2. A NOTICE WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE U/ S 148 OF THE I T ACT 1961 ON 08/02/2013. THE REASONS RECORDED FOR ISSUING NOTICE U/S 148 OF I T ACT ARE NOT AVAILABLE ON RECORD AVAILABLE WITH THIS OFFICE. IN FACT THE ASSESSEE DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS HAD REQUESTED FOR THE SAME VIDE LETTER DATED 13/02/2013 AS THE SAME WAS REQUIRED BY THEM FOR FILING RETURN IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE U/S 148 OF I T ACT . THUS THE ASSESSEE WAS WELL AWARE OF THE FACT THAT PROCEEDINGS UNDER 143(3) RWS 147 OF I .T ACT HAS BEEN INITIATED AGAINST THEM FOR THE A Y 2011 - 12. 9 NATIONAL STANDARD INDIA LTD. 3. FROM THE PERUSAL OF THE AVAILABLE RECORDS IT IS SEEN THAT NO NOTICE U/S 153C WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE. IN FACT THE QUESTIO N OF ISSUING NOTICE U/S 1 53C OF I T ACT DID NOT ARISE AS IT WAS THE ASSESSMENT FOR THE SEARCH YEAR . THE SEARCH TOOK PLACE IN LODH A GROUP ON 10/01/2011 PERTAINING TO F Y 2010 - 11 AND THE AY 2011 - 12 WAS THE SEARCH ASSESSMENT YEAR. THE ASSESSEE COMPANY B ELONG TO THE LODHA GROUP THE A O HAD ISSUED NOTICE FOR THE A YRS 2005 - 06 TO 2010 - 11 (SIX ASSESSMENT YEARS PRIOR TO SEARCH ASSESSMENT YE AR) AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 153C RWS 153AOF I T ACT 1961. YOURS FAITHFULLY, SD/ (RAVINDRA T. MISHRA) DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 7(3), MUMBAI 10. ON A READING OF THE A FORESAID REPORT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER, FOLLOWING FACTS ARE CLEARLY DISCERNIBLE: I) NO NOTICE UNDER SECTION 153C OF THE ACT WAS EVER ISSUED FOR THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEAR; II) NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT WAS ISSUED ON 8 TH FEBRUARY 2013. III) THE ASSESSEE VIDE LETTER DATED 13 TH FEBRUARY 2013, HAD REQUESTED FOR SUPPLY OF REASONS RECORDED. IV) REASONS RECORDED FOR RE OPENING OF ASSESSMENT ARE NOT AVAILABLE ON RECORD; 11. FURTHER, ON A PERUSAL OF THE COPIES OF ORDER SHEET NOTING FROM THE ASSESSMENT RECORD A S FURNISHED BEFORE US, IT IS EVIDENT , NOTICE S U NDER SECTION 153C OF THE ACT WERE ISSUED AND SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE FOR 10 NATIONAL STANDARD INDIA LTD. THE ASSESSMENT YEAR S 2005 06 TO 2010 11. FOR THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEAR, ONLY NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT WAS ISSUED ON 8 TH F EBRUARY 2013. FURTHER, THE ORDER SHEET DOES NOT CONTAIN ANY REASONS RECORDED FOR RE OPENING OF ASSESSMENT FOR THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEAR PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT ON 8 TH FEBRUARY 2013. IN FACT, LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS ) WHILE DEALING WITH ASSESSEES GROUNDS CHALLENGING THE VALIDITY OF THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDER HAS RECORDED A CATEGORICAL FINDING OF FACT THAT THE ASSESSMENT ORDER HAS NOT BEEN PASSED UNDER SECTION 153 C OF THE ACT, BUT HAS BEEN PASSED IN PURSUANCE TO TH E NOTICE ISSUED UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT. AGAINST THE AFORESAID DECISION OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), ADMITTEDLY, THE R EVENUE HAS NOT FILED ANY APPEAL. T HEREFORE, WE HAVE TO PROCEED ON THE BASIS THAT THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDER HAS BEEN PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) R/W SECTION 147 OF THE ACT. 12. KEEPING IN PERSPECTIVE THE AFORESAID FACTUAL POSITION , NOW , IT HAS TO BE EXAMINED, WHETHER, PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT , REASONS FOR RE OPENING OF ASSESSMENT WERE RECORD ED OR NOT AND IN THE EVENT OF NON RECORDING OF REASONS FOR RE OPENING OF ASSESSMENT PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT, WHAT IMPACT IT WILL HAVE ON THE VALIDITY OF THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT 11 NATIONAL STANDARD INDIA LTD. ORDER. THE FACTS AVAILABLE ON RECORD , AS ANALY ZED BY US HEREIN BEFORE , CLEARLY ESTABLISH THAT NO REASONS WERE RECORDED FOR RE OPENING OF ASSESSMENT PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT ON 8 TH FEBRUARY 2013. IN FACT, IMMEDIATELY AFTER RECEIPT OF NOTICE ISSUED UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT, THE ASSESSEE ON 13 TH FEBRUARY 2013 HAD REQUESTED THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR SUPPLY OF REASONS RECORDED. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT SUPPLY THE REASONS RECORDED TO THE ASSESSEE EITHER BEFORE THE COMPLETION OF ASSESSMENT OR THEREAFTER AND NOT EVEN TILL DATE. ON A QUERY FROM THE BENCH, THE REVENUE HAS SUBMITTED THAT REASONS RECORDED FOR RE OPENING OF ASSESSMENT ARE NOT AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THUS, IT IS AN ESTABLISHED FACT ON RECORD THAT PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT NO REASONS WERE RECORDED FOR RE OPENING OF ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 147 OF THE ACT. AT LEAST, NO MATERIAL HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE BY THE REVENUE TO PROVE RECORDING OF REASONS PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT. THE HON'BLE JURISD ICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN CIT V/S TREND ELECTRONICS, [2015] 379 ITR 456 (BOM.) HAS HELD THAT PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT, THE REQUIREMENT OF RECORDING OF REASONS FOR RE OPENING THE ASSESSMENT AND SUPPLY OF SUCH REASONS RECORDED TO THE ASSESSEE DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS HAVE TO BE STRICTLY COMPLIED WITH AS IT IS A JURISDICTIONAL ISSUE. THE HONBLE RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT IN SHIV RATAN SONY (DECE.) (SUPRA) HAS ALSO 12 NATIONAL STANDARD INDIA LTD. EXPRESSED IDENTICAL VIEW. IN FACT, THE HON'BLE JURISDICTIONAL HI GH COURT IN TATA SONS (SUPRA) HAS NOT ONLY HELD THAT PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT , RECORDING OF REASONS IS A MANDATORY REQUIREMENT, BUT , THEY HAVE ALSO HELD THAT THE JURISDICTIONAL ERROR COMMITTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER BY NOT RECORDING THE REASONS FOR ASSESSMENT WOULD NOT BE CURED UNDER SECTION 292B OF THE ACT AND THE NOTICE ISSUED UNDER SECTION 148 WOULD BE WITHOUT JURISDICTION. THE OTHER DECISIONS CITED BY THE LEARNED AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE ALSO EXPRESS SIMILAR VIEW. THUS , AS PER THE RATIO LAID DOWN IN THE AFORESAID DECISIONS, RECORDING OF REASONS FOR RE OPENING OF ASSESSMENT IS A SIN QUA NON FOR ISSUANCE OF NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT. NON COMPLIANCE WITH THE AFORESAID MANDATORY LEGAL REQUIREMENT WOULD NOT ONLY VI TIATE THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, BUT MAKE IT WHOLLY WITHOUT JURISDICTION. IN THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE, IT IS ESTABLISHED ON RECORD , PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT, NO REASON S WERE RECORDED FOR RE OPENING OF ASSESSMENT. THAT BEING THE CASE, THE ISSUANCE OF NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT IS NOT ONLY WITHOUT JURISDICTION BUT THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED CONSEQUENT THEREUPON IS ALSO WITHOUT JURISDICTION, HENCE, VOID AB INITIO. ACCORDINGLY, WE HAVE NO HESITATION IN QU ASHING THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED UNDE R SECTION 153A R/W SECTION 153C/ 143(3) AND UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT. 13 NATIONAL STANDARD INDIA LTD. 13. SINCE , WE HAVE QUASHED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ON THE LEGAL AND JURISDICTIONAL ISSUE, THE GROUNDS RAISED ON MERIT S HAVE BECOME REDUNDANT , HENCE, THERE IS NO NEED TO ADJUDICATE THEM FOR THE PRESENT. 14. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED AS INDICATED ABOVE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 08.01.2020 SD/ - MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SD/ - SAKTIJIT DEY JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 08.01.2020 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : (1) THE ASSESSEE; (2) THE REVENUE; (3) THE CIT(A); (4) THE CIT, MUMBAI CITY CONCERNED; (5) THE DR, ITAT, MUMBAI; (6) GUARD FILE . TRUE COPY BY ORDER PRADEEP J. CHOWDHURY SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, MUMBAI