×Latest Case Laws on Income Tax by various Income Tax Appellate Tribunals in India
These are the latest case laws decided by various Income Tax Appellate Tribunals (ITAT) of India on Income Tax which have been published recently. The case laws are open for discussion and we invite expert comments from our members on its applicability and effect on relevant issues.
This appeal by Assessee has been directed against the Order of the Ld. CIT(A)-2, New Delhi, Dated 13.09.2019, for the A.Y. 2010-2011.
2. Briefly the facts of the case are that return of income for the A.Y. 2010-2011 was filed by the assessee. Notice under section 148 was issued on 27.03.2017 and served upon the assessee. In response to the notice under section 148, assessee filed copy of the return of income declaring loss of Rs.(-)95,916/- already filed on 15.10.2010. The A.O. issued statutory notices for comp etion of the assessment. Though the assessee attended the proceedings and furnished relevant requisite details which have been examined by the A.O. A.O. in the re-assessment order from paras 1 to 8 reproduced the c py of the reasons recorded under section 148 of the I T. Act. Thereafter, A.O. noted that assessee was provided copy of the reasons and objections raised have been disposed of. The assessee has filed submissions giving confirmation copy of the account and copy of the ITR in respect of the parties from whom share capital/share premium were raised during the year under consideration. The A.O. issued notices under section 133(6) of the I.T. Act for verification. Only one party responded. The assessee has not produced the Directors of the concerned parties. Therefore, the A.O. made addition of Rs.7 crores under section 68 of the I.T. Act and also made addition of Rs.14 lakhs on account of Commission paid @ 2%. The assessment order was passed under section 147/143(3) of the I.T. Act. The assessee challenged the reopening of the assessment as well as additions on merit before the Ld. CIT(A). The detailed submissions of the assessee are reproduced by the Ld. CIT(A), however, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of assessee.
3. Learned Counsel for the Assessee referred to proceedings recorded for reop ning of the assessment, copy of which is filed at page-16 of the PB and submitted that reasons are undated. PB-23 is letter of the assessee dated 06.06.2017 requesting the A.O. to supply copy of the sanction accorded by Pr. CIT under section 151 along with copy of the reasons recorded along with all the Annexures, copy of proposal sent for approval and as to when proposal was sanctioned and when proposal was received back. The assessee also asked for copy of the letter of SFIO Dated 05.01.2017 mentioned in the reasons so that the assessee will be able to file objections against the reopening of the assessment. PB-41 is letter of the A.O. whereby approval of the Pr. CIT have been conveyed to the assessee. PB-42 is proforma for recording reasons and approval to be granted dated 09.10.2019. PB-28 is letter of the A.O. dated 27.09.2017 in which it is intimated to the assessee that all the facts on the basis of the report of SFIO (Inv ) Wing of the Department have been incorporated in the reasons which have been provided to him. Further, copy of the report of SFIO (Inv.) Wing of the Income Tax Department is confidential in nature, therefore, same cannot be provided or part with as requested by assessee. Learned Counsel for the Assessee, therefore, submitted that A.O. has refused to supply all the Annexures referred to in the reasons, therefore, assessee was not able to file detailed objections to the reopening of the assessment. PB-13 is notice under section 148 in which A.O. has mentioned that notice have been issued after obtaining necessary satisfaction of Addl. CIT/Pr. CIT/Pr. CCIT. He has submitted that it is not clear
from the notice as to which Authority has granted approval under section 151 of the I.T. Act. He has referred to PB-43 in which the approval of Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax is blank and that Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax while granting approval has mentioned “Yes, I am satisfied”. He has submitted that there is no application of mind before granting approval and such approval is not find valid by various Courts. The A.O. has not applied his mind to the facts and circumstances of the case, therefore, the reassessment order is invalid and bad in law. Since complete copy of the reasons along with Annexures have not been supplied to the assessee, therefore, there is no basis to initiate proceedings under section 148 of the I.T. Act. Learned Counsel for the Assessee relied upon Judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of SABH Infrastructure Ltd., vs ACIT  398 ITR 198 (Del.) (HC) in which the Hon’ble Delhi High Court has directed the Revenue Department to adhere to the following guidelines in the matter of reopening of the assessment.