- (1.) Both Mr. Sengupta and Mr. Saraf, learned Advocates for the respective parties, have made extremely fair submissions, as a result of which this writ can be disposed of at the Court application stage without inviting any affidavits. However, the allegations in the petition are deemed not to be admitted. It appears from the letter of the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 10, Kolkata to the Principal Officer, Jayshree Chemicals Ltd., dated 12th September, 2014 that according to him by the letter of the department dated 10th June, 2014 the objections raised by the petitioner to the reasons advanced by the department in support of the Section 148 notice had been disposed of.
(2.) First of all, it is submitted on behalf of the petitioner by Mr. Sengupta, learned Advocate and supplemented by Mr. J.P. Khaitan, learned Senior Advocate, that their client did not receive the letter dated 10th June, 2014. Secondly they submit, very rightly in my opinion, that the department could not have disposed of their client's objection on 10th June, 2014, when the objection to the reasons was made for the first time on 30th June, 2014. Furthermore, it appears that by a subsequent letter dated 8th September, 2014 the petitioner reiterated their objections. This was replied to by the said letter dated 12th September, 2014 in the following terms:- "Vide your letter dated 03.09.2014, filed in this office on 05.09.2014, you have pointed out that without disposing of the objection petition, no further action is permissible as per decisions to various Courts. But the fact was that the objection petition was disposed of vide this office letter dated 10.06.2014. Vide your letter dated 08.09.2014, filed in this office on 09.09.2014, you have reiterated the aforesaid said objections. From the facts of the case and the reasons recorded for reopening of the case by invoking the provisions of Section 147, you would appreciate that the notice under Section 148 was lawfully made. This disposes of all the objections raised by you. In this view of the facts of the case, you may furnish details/documents in support of your case. The last date for furnishing the same is fixed on 24.09.2014."
(3.) In my opinion, according to the ratio of GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. reported in 259 ITR page 19, on receipt of reasons the assessee is entitled to file objections to the issuance of the notice and the Assessing Officer is bound to dispose of the same by passing a speaking order, before proceeding with the assessment under Section 147 of the Act. Therefore, what is conceived in the said judgment is a kind of preliminary assessment where the Assessing Officer is to decide whether to proceed with the assessment under Section 147 of the Act or to drop it, considering the objection of the assessee. It follows that the Assessing Officer has to apply his mind and consider the objections of the assessee to the Section 148 notice. He cannot rely on some previous decision made by him or some reasons advanced by him previously in support of the Section 148 notice, to justify proceeding with the assessment under Section 147 of the Act: Therefore the reliance of the Assessing Officer on the letter dated 10th June, 2014 (if at all this letter was issued) was misconceived as it was prior to the filing of objections by the assessee.;