Скачать или смотреть Whether assessment u/s 147 without disposing off objections deserves to be quashed or needs remand?

Link of full case : https://taxlawsonline.com/agtlol.html...

[2025] 482 ITR 916 (Karn)
[IN THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT]

HEWLETT PACKARD FINANCIAL SERVICES (INDIA) PVT. LTD.
v.
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX AND OTHERS

S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV J.

June 1, 2023.

Playlist: Objections, 148

148: Issue of notice where income has escaped assessment

A.Y. 2011-12 / Assessee

Question: Whether assessment u/s 147 without disposing off objections deserves to be quashed or needs remand?

1. Notice u/s 148 issued to assessee.

2. Return filed and objections raised against the notice issued u/s 148.

3. Earlier also the assessment of the assessee was completed u/s 143(3).

4. The assessment order u/s 147 was passed without disposing off the objection of the assessee.

5. The assessee filed the writ petition for quashing off the assessment for not following the mandate of Apex Court in the case of GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. v. ITO [2003] 259 ITR 19, for not disposing off the objections before filing the assessment order u/s 147.

6. Revenue contended that in the event the procedure prescribed under GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. v. ITO is not followed as in the present case, the notice u/s 148 requires to be protected while directing the A.O. to redo the procedure after following the procedure as laid down in GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. v. ITO and relies on the Judgment of Madras High Court in the case of Home Finders Housing Ltd v. ITO [2018] 404 ITR 611 (Madras).

7. The assessee relied on the Judgment of Division bench in the case of Deepak Extrusions Pvt. Ltd v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax [2017] 80 taxmann.com 77 in which it was held that procedure in GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. v. ITO is a procedure that has been held to be mandatory and accordingly, the division bench has rejected the contention raised by the revenue that the Judgement in Home Finders Housing Ltd. v. ITO ought to have been followed.

8. The assessment is liable to be quashed.

9. The Hon’ble court also relied on the Judgment of Asst. CIT v. Mphasis Ltd. [2023] 22 ITR-OL 643 (Karnataka)

#hewlettpackard #Financial #Services
#Karnataka #HighCourt
#1June #2023
#Objection
#Section148
#IncomeTaxNotices
#IncomeTaxCases
#incometaxcasesanalysis
#IncomeTaxLaw
#advocateamitkumargupta
#9811291390(Call only after taking time on whatsApp)
#[email protected]
#[email protected]

Link for some important videos:

1) WHETHER TRIBUNAL CAN REMAND MATTER IN ENTIRETY WHERE DEPARTMENT DID NOT FILE CROSS APPEALS?- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkqMk...

2) WHETHER ASSESSEE HAS ALSO TO CHALLENGE THE FINDINGS OF THE A.O THAT NOTICE HAS BEEN SERVED?- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbZWh...

3) WHETHER EXTENDED TIME LIMIT U/S 149(1)(b) CAN BE USED ON THE BASIS OF SALES CONSIDERATION U/S 48?- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WuRt9...

4) WHETHER NOTICE SENT TO SECONDARY EMAIL IS VALID IF NOT SENT TO PRIMARY E-MAIL U/S 148?- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aAzHE...

5) WHETHER ENTRIES IN BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS CONCLUSIVE TO DETERMINE TAXABLE INCOME OF ASSESSEE?- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rx8JQ...