| The Tax Publishers2020 TaxPub(DT) 2832 (Kol-Trib) INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 147 read with section 148
Section 148 does not authorize AO to issue fresh notice when proceedings on a previous notice under section 148 are still pending and have not been finally disposed of. Thus, second notice under section 148 without disposing of return filed pursuant to first reopening notice was invalid and, therefore, all consequential actions, which culminated in assessment order, were null and void.
|
Reassessment - Validity - Issuance of second notice under section 148 when proceedings on a previous reassessment notice were still pending -
Issue was as regards validity of action of AO in issuing the second notice under section 148, when first notice issued by AO under section 148, consequent to which assessee had filed return, no reassessment order was passed by AO. Held: Section 148 does not authorize AO to issue fresh notice when proceedings on a previous notice under section 148 are still pending and have not been finally disposed of. There was force in contention of assessee that second notice under section 148 without disposing of return filed pursuant to first reopening notice was invalid and, therefore, all consequential actions, which culminated in assessment order, were null in eyes of law and resultantly void.
Followed:Commercial Art Press v. CIT(1978) 115 ITR 876 (All) : 1978 TaxPub(DT) 1021 (All-HC).
REFERRED : CIT, Madras v. S. Raman Chettiar (1965) 55 ITR 630 (SC) : 1965 TaxPub(DT) 0210 (SC), Indian Tube Co. Limited. v. ITO. (2005) 272 ITR 439 (Cal) : 2005 TaxPub(DT) 0304 (Cal-HC) and ASSP and Co. v. CIT (1988)172 ITR 274 (Mad.) : 1988 TaxPub(DT) 0145 (Mad-HC).
FAVOUR : In assessee's favour.
A.Y. : 2008-09
IN THE ITAT, KOLKATA BENCH
 SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT
|