Narendra Kumar Modi v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Centre Circle

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6700/2022 Narendra Kumar Modi S/o Late Shri Mahavir Prasad Modi, AgedAbout 63 Years, R/o C-798, Budh Vihar, Alwar 301001, RajasthanIndia ----Petitioner Versus 1. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Centre Circle 1,C.r. Building, Moti Doongri Road, Alwar RajasthanC.r. Building, Moti Doongri Road, Alwar Rajasthan 2. National Faceless Assessment Center, Income Tax Depart-ment, Ministry Of Finance, Room No 401, 2Nd Floor, E-Ramp, Jawaharalal Nehru Stadium, Delhi-110 003ment, Ministry Of Finance, Room No 401, 2Nd Floor, E-Ramp, Jawaharalal Nehru Stadium, Delhi-110 003 ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mahendra Gargieya withMr. Karan AhujaMr. Hemang GargieyaFor Respondent(s): Mr. Anuroop Singhi withMr. N.S Bhati &Mr. Aditya Khandelwal HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUKESH RAJPUROHITOrder 28/05/2025 1.This petition is filed seeking quashing of order dated31.03.2022, passed under Section 147 read with Section 144B ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961. 2.The short grievance raised is that the objections filed againstre-opening of the assessment were not decided in compliance ofthe decision of the Supreme Court in GKN Driveshafts India Ltd. Vs. Income Tax Officer and Ors reported in [(2003) 259ITR 19], wherein it was held:- “5. We see no justifiable reason to interferewith the order under challenge. However,we clarify that when a notice under Section148 of the Income Tax Act is issued, theproper course of action for the notice is to file return and if he so desires, to seek rea-sons for issuing notices. The assessing offi-cer is bound to furnish reasons within areasonable time. On receipt of reasons, thenotice is entitled to file objections to is-suance of notice and the assessing officeris bound to dispose of the same by passinga speaking order. In the instant case, asthe reasons have been disclosed in theseproceedings, the assessing officer has todispose of the objections, is filed, by pass-ing a speaking order, before proceedingwith the assessment in respect of theabovesaid five assessment years. 6. Insofar as the appeals filed against theorder of assessment before the Commis-sioner (Appeals), we direct the appellateauthority to dispose of the same, expedi-tiously.order of assessment before the Commis-sioner (Appeals), we direct the appellateauthority to dispose of the same, expedi-tiously. 7. With the above observations, the civilappeals are dismissed.”appeals are dismissed.” 3.Learned counsel for the respondents defends the impugnedorder but is not in a position to demonstrate from the record thatthe objections filed were dealt with by passing a speaking order. 4.The guidelines issued by the Supreme Court in GKNDriveshafts (supra) have not been followed. Consequently theimpugned order is set aside. The matter is remitted back to therespondent No.1 to decide the objections of the petitioner in ac-cordance with law. 5.It is clarified that the petitioner shall not raise the issue thatthe proceedings are time barred. 6. The writ petition is allowed. (MUKESH RAJPUROHIT),J (AVNEESH JHINGAN),J DIKSHA MISHRA /61