Case Law Details

Case Name : Stallion Garments Vs. Asst. CIT (Madras High Court)
Appeal Number : Writ Petition Nos. 38280 & 38288 of 2005, W.P.M.P. No. 40936 of 2005
Date of Judgement/Order : 06/09/2017
Related Assessment Year :
Courts : All High Courts (4166) Madras High Court (312)

Stallion Garments Vs. Asst. CIT (Madras High Court)

It is the consistent case of the petitioner that the reasons were not communicated to them, and such a specific stand has been taken in the Writ Petitions, which were filed on 23-11-2005, i.e., much after the date on which, it is stated that the assessee received the letter, dated 14-11-2005. However, this Court does not propose to dwell further into such controversy, considering the fact that the Writ Petitions are of the year 2005, and the matters are remain pending for all these years, and order of interim stay has been operating. If the petitioner had been communicated with the reason for issuance of the impugned notices, then, they would have been in a position to subject their objections and proceed with the matter in accordance with directives issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, in the case of (GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd., v. ITO(2003) 259 ITR 19 (SC).

Thus, without going into the controversy as to whether the petitioner has been communicated the reason for re-opening or not, there will be a direction to the respondent to communicate the reason for reopening for both the assessment years 2002-03 and 2003-04 within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of the reason for re-opening, the petitioner is directed to submit their objections within a period of 30 days therefrom. On receipt of the objections, the respondent shall consider the same and pass a speaking order on merits and in accordance with law.

FULL TEXT OF THE HIGH COURT JUDGMENT / ORDER IS AS FOLLOWS:-

Heard Mr. R. Asokan, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. A.P. Srinivas, the learned Senior Panel Counsel for the respondent.

2. The petitioner has filed these Writ Petitions, challenging the notices issued by the respondent under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter, referred to as the Act) stating that, he has reason to believe that the income chargeable to tax for the assessment years 2002-03 and 2003-04 has escaped the assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the Act. The petitioner was further informed that the respondent proposes to re-assess the income for the said assessment years and directed the petitioner to file return of income within a time frame.

3. The petitioner is before this Court, on the ground that the reason for re-opening have not been furnished to the petitioner.

4. In the counter affidavit filed by the respondent, in relation to W.P. No. 38280 of 2005, in para No. 5, it has been stated that, in the Office letter, dated 14-11-2005, the assessee was intimated the reason for issue of notice under section 148 of the Act, dated 26-10-2005, and the letter, dated 14-11-2005 was served on the assessee on 19-11-2005.

5. It is the consistent case of the petitioner that the reasons were not communicated to them, and such a specific stand has been taken in the Writ Petitions, which were filed on 23-11-2005, i.e., much after the date on which, it is stated that the assessee received the letter, dated 14-11-2005. However, this Court does not propose to dwell further into such controversy, considering the fact that the Writ Petitions are of the year 2005, and the matters are remain pending for all these years, and order of interim stay has been operating. If the petitioner had been communicated with the reason for issuance of the impugned notices, then, they would have been in a position to subject their objections and proceed with the matter in accordance with directives issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, in the case of (GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd., v. ITO(2003) 259 ITR 19 (SC).

6. Thus, without going into the controversy as to whether the petitioner has been communicated the reason for re-opening or not, there will be a direction to the respondent to communicate the reason for reopening for both the assessment years 2002-03 and 2003-04 within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of the reason for re-opening, the petitioner is directed to submit their objections within a period of 30 days therefrom. On receipt of the objections, the respondent shall consider the same and pass a speaking order on merits and in accordance with law.

7. In the result, both the Writ Petitions are disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

Download Judgment/Order

More Under Income Tax

Posted Under

Category : Income Tax (27605)
Type : Judiciary (11759)
Tags : high court judgments (4478) Reassessment (257) section 147 (448) section 148 (374)

One response to “Reopening proceedings without communicating reasons for reopening to assessee not valid”

  1. CHANDAN SINGH KARKI says:

    usefull to me

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *