Case Law Details
Brief of the Case
Karnataka High Court held In the case of M/s Kothari Metals vs. ITO that in this case it is clear that the assessee was not provided reasons for re-opening and also the statement recorded by the AO was not available to the assessee. As there is gross violation of principles of natural justice, we are of the opinion that writ petition against the re-assessment order ought to have been entertained and dismissal of the writ petition on the ground of availability of alternative remedy was not justified in the facts of the present case.
Facts of the Case
The assessee filed his return of income for the assessment year 2006-07 which was accepted under Section 143(1). Subsequently notice under Section 148 was issued for re-opening of the assessment. In response to the same, the appellant requested the respondent to treat the earlier return filed as the return filed in response to the notice issued. The appellant also prayed for furnishing the reasons for issuance of notice under Section 148 of the Act. Even when no reason for the issuance of the notice was furnished to the appellant, the Assessing Officer commenced proceedings for re-assessment of the income of the assessee/appellant for the said assessment year and issued questionnaire under Section 142(1). From the questionnaire issued to the assessee, it appears that re-opening of the assessment was on the basis of statement recorded by the Income Tax authorities of some other person, which statement was never furnished to the appellant. Assessee filed a writ petition which was dismissed on the ground that the assessee had alternate remedy to appeal.
Contention of the Assessee Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
