Case Number: ITA 1780/DEL/2019
Appellant: Ramakant U Sharma HUF
Respondent: ITO, Ward-32(5), New Delhi
Assessment Year: 2010-11
Date of Filing: March 5, 2019
Order Type: Final Tribunal Order
Date of Order: October 31, 2022
Date Pronounced: October 31, 2022
The case ITA 1780/DEL/2019, filed by Ramakant U Sharma HUF against the ITO, Ward-32(5), New Delhi, pertains to the assessment year 2010-11. The appeal challenges the correctness of the order dated February 14, 2019, passed by the CIT(A)-11, New Delhi.
The appellant, represented by Sh. Parkash A. Doshi, CA, raised concerns over the jurisdictional issue regarding the reopening of the assessment. The main contention was the absence of reasons provided by the Assessing Officer (AO) for reopening the assessment.
The case was heard by the Delhi Bench ‘SMC’ of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, presided over by Smt Diva Singh, Judicial Member. The hearing took place on October 26, 2022, and the order was pronounced on October 31, 2022.
The appellant raised several grounds, primarily focusing on the lack of jurisdiction for reopening the assessment. The main arguments included:
The learned AR, Sh. Parkash A. Doshi, highlighted multiple instances where the department sought time to bring on record documents supporting the jurisdictional issue. Despite several opportunities, the assessment records were not produced, leading to a significant jurisdictional challenge.
The Sr. DR, Sh. Om Prakash, confirmed the department’s inability to produce the relevant assessment records, stating that the records for the specific period were not located. This lack of documentation made it challenging to address the jurisdictional issue adequately.
The Tribunal noted that the Revenue had been given multiple opportunities to substantiate the reasons for reopening the assessment but failed to do so. The repeated failure to produce the assessment records or provide the reasons for reopening the assessment led to the conclusion that the reasons might never have been recorded.
The Tribunal emphasized the importance of following mandatory procedures for reopening assessments. Without demonstrating the availability of the reasons recorded for reopening, the assumption of jurisdiction and the exercise of power were deemed unsustainable. Consequently, the orders were quashed.
The appeal of the assessee, Ramakant U Sharma HUF, was allowed. The Tribunal’s decision was based on the following grounds:
This case underscores the importance of following due process in tax assessments, particularly in matters of reopening assessments. The decision highlights the necessity for the Revenue to maintain proper documentation and provide reasons for reopening assessments to uphold the principles of transparency and accountability.
This case is part of a broader set of appeals involving jurisdictional challenges and the proper recording of reasons for reopening assessments. Similar cases have emphasized the importance of adherence to procedural requirements to ensure fair and just assessments.
For instance, in the case of ITA No. 7489/Del/2018, the Tribunal highlighted the need for clear and documented reasons for reopening assessments to avoid arbitrary or unjustified actions by the Revenue.
Such cases serve as essential references for tax professionals and businesses, providing insights into the legal principles governing tax assessments and the importance of procedural compliance by the Revenue.
Note: This article is a summary of the tribunal’s order in ITA 1780/DEL/2019 and related cases. For detailed information, please refer to the official tribunal records.
Ramakant U Sharma HUF vs. ITO, Ward-32(5), New Delhi: Assessment Year 2010-11
Manage the increasing number of hearings effortlessly by leveraging the legal AI revolution We are India's Leading revolutionary AI-powered legal platform where you can get enough insights into top cases and judgements.
Research Platform