/** * The main template file * * This is the most generic template file in a WordPress theme * and one of the two required files for a theme (the other being style.css). * It is used to display a page when nothing more specific matches a query. * E.g., it puts together the home page when no home.php file exists. * * @link https://developer.wordpress.org/themes/basics/template-hierarchy/ * * @package WordPress * @subpackage Tally * @since 1.0.0 */ ?>
In P.H. Chandrashekar v. ITO Ward-1(2) [C.O. No.106/Bang/2017] along with ITO Ward-1(2) Mysore v. P.H. Chandrashekar [ITA No.1080/Bang/2015 dated September 24, 2021], the current cross objection application by P.H. Chandrashekar (“the Assessee”) has been filed challenging the Order dated March 20, 2015 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (“CIT(A)”) which upheld the Assessment Order dated April 03, 2013 by the Assessing Officer (“the AO”) under Section 147 read with Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the IT Act”).
The AO reopened the assessment of the Assessee after it was observed that the Assessee had not reflected or explained his investment in a hotel project during a survey operation. Thereafter, the Assessee filed an application before the CIT(A) challenging the validity of reopening of assessment, which was subsequently rejected and disposed of by the CIT(A) on the ground that the AO had correctly followed the procedure as contemplated in the IT Act and there was no infirmity in the action of the AO regarding reopening, all of which has been in accordance with law.
The Assessee contended that he had filed objections vide a detailed letter dated March 01, 2013, but the AO disposed those objections before completion of the assessment which was contrary to the procedure laid down in the case of GKN Drive Shafts (India) Ltd., V/s. ITO 259 1TR 19 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Therefore, the impuged assessment order is liable to be quashed.
The Hon’ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore (“ITAT”) relied on the judgments rendered by Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in Deepak Extrusions Pvt. Ltd. V. DCIT W.P.No.33125/2017 (T-IT) along with the case of Shri Lakshmana Vs. ITO in ITA No.382/Bang/2018 before the ITAT, Bangalore which held that the order of assessment by the AO cannot be sustained for the reason that due compliance and mandatory procedure of disposal of the objections before proceeding with the assessment was not followed by the AO.
Noted, and hold that non-disposal of objections filed by the Assessee before the completion of assessment is against the procedure prescribed in the case of GKN Drive Shafts (India) Ltd (supra) passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. For this reason, the impugned assessment order is vitiated and liable to be quashed.
(Author can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org)
DISCLAIMER: The views expressed are strictly of the author and A2Z Taxcorp LLP. The contents of this article are solely for informational purpose and for the reader’s personal non-commercial use. It does not constitute professional advice or recommendation of firm. Neither the author nor firm and its affiliates accepts any liabilities for any loss or damage of any kind arising out of any information in this article nor for any actions taken in reliance thereon. Further, no portion of our article or newsletter should be used for any purpose(s) unless authorized in writing and we reserve a legal right for any infringement on usage of our article or newsletter without prior permission.
The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in P.R Commissioner of Income Tax v. M/s United Spirits Ltd. [I.T.A. No. 548/2015 c/w I.T.A No. 37/2010 decided on September 2, 2021] answered in favor
In Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax v. Sonu Realtors Private Limited [INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.956 OF 2017 dated October 11, 2021], Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (“the Appellant”) filed the appeal being
In Shri Shanthilal Movji Bhai Thakker v. The Income Tax Officer [ITA No. 2267-2270/Chny/2019 decided on November 3, 2021] Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai (“ITAT”) held that rental income from
The Hon’ble Orissa High Court (“Orissa HC”) in the matter of Smt. Smrutisudha Nayak v. Union of India and Others [W.P. (C) Nos. 10587 OF 2009 dated October 27, 2021], held that assessment proceedings
In M/s. Krishna Bhagya Jala Nigam Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore [ITA 3064 /BANG/2018, decided on November 10, 2021], Hon’ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore (“ITAT”)