M/S.anand Cine Servicerepresented By Mr.anand Prasadpartnerno v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,Non-Corporate Circle 20(1),Aayakar Bhavan, Annexure Building

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 16.04.2021 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM W.P.No.28990 of 2018andW.M.P.Nos.33892, 33895 & 33899 of 2018and W.M.P.No.1927 of 2020 M/s.Anand Cine ServiceRepresented by Mr.Anand PrasadPartnerNo.3, Sarangapani Street,T-Nagar, Chennai – 600 017. ..Petitioner Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,Non-Corporate Circle 20(1),Aayakar Bhavan, Annexure Building,No.121, Mahatma Gandhi Road,Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034. ..Respondent Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of theConstitution of India, to issue a Writ of CertiorarifiedMandamus, calling for the records of the respondent contained inits notice No.ITBA/AST/S/148/2017-18/1009512166(1) issued underSection 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for PAN: ,dated 28.03.2018, for assessment year 2013-14, and allproceedings in furtherance thereof, including the noticeF.No.AAAFA4996K/AY 2013-14/ACIT/NCC-20(1)/Chennai issued underSection 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for PAN: ,dated 22.10.2018 and to quash the same as arbitrary, unjust andillegal, and to consequently forbear the respondent from in anymanner reassessing the petitioner's income under Section 147 ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2013-14. For Petitioner: Mr.Suhrith Parthasarathy For Respondent: M/s.Hema Muralikrishnan Senior Standing Counsel ORDER The order dated 28.03.2018 passed by the AssistantCommissioner of Income Tax is under challenge in the presentwrit petition. 2. The order impugned is a Notice under Section 148 ofthe Income Tax Act. 3. The learned counsel for the writ petitioner reiteratedthat the order under challenge is non-speaking and therefore,the petitioner is not in a position to defend the case properly. 4. Perusal of the order impugned, reveals that theAssistant Commissioner of Income Tax has stated that he hasreasons to believe to re-open the assessment. The competentauthority under the Statute, is expected to furnish reasons forforming such an opinion. In the absence of any such reasons, onecannot expect the assessee to defend the case properly. TheHon'ble Supreme Court of India, in clear terms, held that theorder, re-opening the assessment must contain the reasons,enabling the assessee to defend the case with reference to thedocuments and evidences available. 5. This being the basic principles to be followed, theimpugned order is non-speaking and therefore, untenable.Accordingly, the order impugned dated 28.03.2018 passed by theAssistant Commissioner of Income Tax in proceedings inNo.ITBA/AST/S/148/2017-18/1009512166(1) is quashed and thematter is remanded back to the respondent for freshconsideration and pass a speaking order by following theprocedures as contemplated. The said exercise is directed to bedone within a period of three (3) months from the date ofreceipt of a copy of this order. The petitioner is also directedto co-operate for the expeditious disposal of the case by thecompetent authority under the Statute and Rules. 6. With these observations, the writ petition standsallowed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneouspetitions are closed.Sd/-Assistant Registrar(CS-VI) //True copy// Kak Sub Assistant Registrar https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ To Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,Non-Corporate Circle 20(1),Aayakar Bhavan, Annexure Building,No.121, Mahatma Gandhi Road,Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034. +1cc to M/s.Hema Muralikrishnan, Advocate SR.No.23071 +1cc to Mr.Arun Karthik, Advocate SR.No.23017 W.P.No.28990 of 2018RSI(CO)GMY(04/06/2021)