INCOME TAX ACT, 1961

--Appeal [Tribunal]--Additional ground Admissibility--Assessee in application for admission of additional grounds had not given any reason as to why such additional grounds could not be raised in grounds of appeal before Tribunal. though assessee had agitated issue of initiation of proceedings under section 148 before Commissioner (Appeals) but nothing was submitted before Commissioner (Appeals) to challenge issue of notice under section 148 and even in written submission filed before Commissioner (Appeals), no such reasons or grounds have been mentioned. It is for first time when hearing of appeal before Tribunal was taken up assessee raised additional grounds challenging reopening of assessment but no reasons have been given to raise same in main ground thus, there was no bona fide omission or good reasons arise in favour of assessee to raise additional grounds of appeal same is, therefore, rejected or could not be admitted.

Assessee in the application for admission of additional ground has not given any reasons as to why such additional grounds could not be raised in the grounds of appeal before the Tribunal. Tribunal may also add here that definitely, the assessee has no bona fide or good reasons to raise the above grounds in the main grounds before the Tribunal. Though the assessee has agitated the issue of initiation of proceedings under section 148 before Commissioner (Appeals), but nothing was submitted before the Commissioner (Appeals) to challenge the issue of notice under section 148 and even in the written submissions filed before the learned Commissioner (Appeals), no such reasons or grounds have been mentioned (paper book 13) to challenge the initiation of reassessment proceedings. The Commissioner (Appeals) also specifically noted in the appellate order that nothing was also orally argued by the assessee's counsel against reopening of assessment under section 148. The learned Commissioner (Appeals), therefore, rightly held that the assessee does not want to press this ground of appeal and accordingly, the same was rightly dismissed by the Commissioner (Appeals). It is well-settled law that no appeal lies on agreed assessment because there is no grievance of the assessee or the department in such a situation when something is agreed for the purpose of assessment. [Para 5] Considering the facts of the case and the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals), it is clear from record that the assessee did not agitate reopening of assessment under section 148 before the assessing officer at the reassessment stage and even if reopening was challenged before the Commissioner (Appeals) for the first time, the assessee's counsel neither orally nor in the written submissions agitated this issue or highlighted any point to challenge reopening of assessment. Therefore, the Commissioner (Appeals) correctly noted that the assessee does not want to press this ground of appeal before him. The conduct of the assessee before the assessing officer and the conduct of the learned counsel for assessee before the Commissioner (Appeals) clearly shows that the assessee agreed to the assumption of jurisdiction by the assessing officer under section 148 of the Income Tax Act and the assessee in fact agreed before the learned Commissioner (Appeals) that assessee has nothing to say with regard to reopening of assessment. Thus, no grievance left to the assessee to challenge the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) on this issue. Precisely, this was the reason due to which the assessee did not raise the issue of reopening of assessment under section 148 in the main grounds of appeal before the Tribunal. It is for the first time when hearing of appeal was taken up, the assessee raised the additional ground Nos. 1 and 2 challenging the reopening of assessment, but no reasons have been given why the same could not be raised in the main grounds of appeal. Thus, there was no bona fide omission or good reasons arise in favour of the assessee to raise the above additional grounds of appeal. Further, the issue of jurisdiction under section 148 is not purely a question of law and it requires adjudication of facts and consideration of reasons and material, on which reopening of assessment has been made. Therefore, the contention of the counsel for the assessee that it is purely a legal question is also rejected. Considering the above discussion Tribunal not inclined to admit additional ground Nos. 1 and 2 raised by assessee in her application dated 10-10-2012. The request of the assessee for admission of additional grounds of appeal is, accordingly, rejected. [Para 6]