Shipping Corporation of India Limited Vs Additional/Joint/Deputy/ACIT (ITAT Mumbai)
ITAT Mumbai held that passing of assessment order u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act without disposing the objections raised by the assessee is not sustainable being without jurisdiction. Accordingly, reassessment notice u/s. 148 set aside.
Facts- The assessee electronically filed its return of income on 29/11/2016 declaring total income of Rs.1,79,14,88,584/- under normal provisions of the Act and book profit of Rs.1,65,32,24,597/- u/s 115JB of the Act. The return was selected for scrutiny assessment and vide order dated 11/12/2018, framed u/s 143(3) of the Act, the returned income was assessed at Rs.2,23,10,90,360/- under the normal provisions of the Act and book profit at Rs.1,88,11,20,919/- u/s 115JB of the Act. Vide notice dated 27/03/2021 issued u/s 148 of the Act, the AO proposed to assess/re-assess the income of the assessee.
AO finally framed the assessment order dated 30/03/2022 u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act without disposing the objections raised by the assessee. The entire quarrel revolves around this action of the AO.
Conclusion- Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Bayer Material Science (P) Ltd. vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax-10(3) that the draft Assessment order was passed on 30th March, 2015 without having disposed of the Petitioner’s objections to the reasons recorded in support of the impugned notice. The reasons were supplied to the Petitioner only on 19th March, 2015 and the Petitioner had filed the objections to the same on 25th March, 2015. This passing of the draft Assessment order without having disposed of the objections is in defiance of the Supreme Court’s decision in GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. (supra). Thus, the draft Assessment order dated 30th March, 2015 is not sustainable being without jurisdiction.
