Assessment Order quashed on ground of Non-Disposal of Objections filed by Assessee


Quick Summary
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has quashed an assessment order against an Assessee. This decision was made because the Assessing Officer (AO) failed to properly dispose of the Assessee's objections before completing the assessment. The ITAT followed established legal precedent, including a Supreme Court ruling, which mandates that objections must be addressed before an assessment can be finalised.

Court :
ITAT Bangalore

Brief :
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").

Citation :
ITA No.1080/Bang/2015 dated September 24, 2021

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.

FAQ :

The assessment order was quashed because the Assessing Officer (AO) did not properly dispose of the objections filed by the Assessee before completing the assessment.

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) followed the precedent set by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of GKN Drive Shafts (India) Ltd. v. ITO, which requires objections to be disposed of before assessment completion.

The Assessee challenged the validity of the reopening of their assessment and also filed objections regarding the assessment process itself.

The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) had previously rejected the Assessee's challenge to the reopening of assessment, stating the AO had followed the correct procedure.

 

Bimal Jain
Published in Income Tax
Views : 149

Comments




CCI Pro



Company
ARTICLESHIP 14 August 2026
Article Assistant

N J Suresh & Associates

Bengaluru

CA Inter

View Details
Company
18 August 2026
Audit Assistant - Remote / Work From Home

CA ANOOP P K & ASSOCIATES

Kozhikode

CA Inter

View Details
Company
24 August 2026
Semi-Qualified CA/CA Finalist - Tax, GST, Audit & Accounts

Bharat Shah & Associates

Mumbai

CA Inter

View Details
Company
ARTICLESHIP 01 September 2026
Articles

Saini Pati Shah & Co LLP, Chartered Accountants

Mumbai

CA Foundation

View Details
Company
ARTICLESHIP 25 August 2026
CA Article's

Saini Pati Shah & Co LLP

Mumbai

CA Inter

View Details
Company
21 August 2026
Accountant

A G International

Kolkata

B.Com

View Details
Company
27 August 2026
ACCOUNTANT

CHARUPREETI & CO

Noida

Graduate (Any)

View Details
Company
ARTICLESHIP 24 August 2026
Article Assistant

M/s.S.G.Salecha & Co.

Mumbai

CA Inter

View Details