Mukesh Modi Versus Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax and Another
Reopening of assessment – assessment under section 153A read with section 143(3) of the Act was completed on the strength of seized record/impounded documents, thereby making various additions of Income-tax in the hands of Mukesh Modi, Diksha Jain and Bharat Das Vaishnav – reasons for reopening first respondent has not recorded cogent reasons – Held that:- Notices issued to the assessees by the Assessing Officer under section 147/148 of the Act are not satisfying the pre-requisites for the same. There is no whisper in the notice, or iota of proof that while issuing the same the Assessing Officer had reason to believe that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for the assessment year. Thus, the notice has been issued by the Assessing Officer simply for his own verification and to clear his doubts and suspicions to re-examine the material which were already available on record at the time of passing of the earlier assessment orders. The Legislature under section 147 has not clothed the Assessing Officer with such jurisdiction, therefore, the action cannot be upheld in the background of the facts of the instant case. One more redeeming fact which has a direct nexus with the subsequent reassessment proceedings and ramification of the same has culminated into reassessment orders is the impugned order whereby the Assessing Officer has rejected the objections submitted by the assessees pursuant to the notice under section 147/148 of the Act. The order passed by the Assessing Officer in this behalf is not a speaking order which cannot be sustained. In view of the legal infirmity in the notice under section 147/148 of the Act and laconic order of the Assessing Officer while rejecting the objections of the assessees the consequential assessment orders are also liable to be annulled. – Decided in favour of assessee.
Source – TMI