The Assistant Commissioner Ofincome Tax, Non Corporatecircle Ii, Coimbatore v. Mr.t.saikrishnan For M/S.sai, Bharath & Ilan

In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Dated : 08.11.2016 Coram : The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM Writ Petition No.38210 of 2016 &WMP.Nos.32757 & 32838 of 2016 M.Gurusamy The Assistant Commissioner ofIncome Tax, Non CorporateCircle II, Coimbatore. Vs ...Petitioner ...Respondent PETITION under Article 226 of The Constitution of Indiapraying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari to call for therecords on the file of the respondent relating to the noticeissued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated3.2.2016 in PAN No. and quash the same. For Petitioner : For Respondent : Mr.T.Saikrishnan for M/s.Sai, Bharath & Ilan Mr.T.Pramod Kumar Chopda, SSC ORDER Mr.T.Pramod Kumar, Chopda, learned Senior Standing Counselaccepts notice for the respondent. Heard both. By consent, thewrit petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 2. The petitioner seeks to quash the notice issued by therespondent under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated3.2.2016. In the said notice, the respondent had stated that hehas reason to believe that the petitioner's income chargeable totax for the year 2009-10 escaped assessment within the meaningof Section 147 of the said Act. Therefore, the respondentproposed to assess/re-assess the income for the said assessmentyear and called upon the petitioner to file the returns in theprescribed form within 30 days. 3. The petitioner sent a representation to the respondent on4.3.2016 stating that he had already filed the return of incomefor the said assessment year vide acknowledgement dated25.6.2009 and requested the respondent that the return of income https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ already filed, may be treated as due compliance of the impugnednotice. Thereafter another representation was sent by thepetitioner on 7.9.2016 stating that no particulars have beenfurnished in the impugned notice and he is not aware of thebasis for reopening and reiterated that there are nocircumstances justifying reopening. 4. On receipt of the representation dated 7.9.2016, by acommunication dated 24.10.2016, the respondent communicated thereasons for reopening. 5. In the light of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Courtin the case of GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. Vs. ITO [reported in(2003) 259 ITR 19], the petitioner/assessee is entitled tosubmit their objections to the reasons for reopening. It is onlythereafter the respondent has to pass orders either accepting orrejecting the objections so made. Therefore, at this stage ofthe matter, the question of quashing the impugned notice doesnot arise in the light of the fact that after issuance of theimpugned notice, by a communication dated 24.10.2016, therespondent communicated the reasons for reopening. Therefore,the petitioner has to comply with the directives of the Hon'bleSupreme Court in the decision in GKN Driveshafts and follow theprocedure contemplated therein. 6. In the light of the above, the writ petition is disposedof granting 15 days' time from the date of receipt of a copy ofthis order, to the petitioner to submit his objections to thereasons for reopening communicated by proceedings dated24.10.2016. On receipt of the objections, the respondent shallconsider the same and pass a speaking order on merits and inaccordance with law, within a period of 10 days thereafter. Tillorders are passed, no precipitative action shall be initiatedpursuant to the notice issued under Section 143(2) of the saidAct dated 24.10.2016. No costs. Consequently, the above WMPs areclosed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar To The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Non Corporate CircleII, Coimbatore. +1cc to Mr. Sai Bharath, Advocate, S.R.No.64270 +1cc to Mr. T. Pramod Kumar Chopre, Advocate, S.R.No.63812 GJII(CO) md (9/11/2016) WP.No.38210 of 2016 & WMP.Nos.32757 & 32838 of 2016