ORDER SHEET WP No. 985 of 2016 IN HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE M/S ELITE PHARMACEUTICALS & ANR Versus INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 46 (1) KOLKATA BEFORE: Hon'ble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK Date : 15th September, 2017. Appearance: Mr. R.N.Dutt, Adv. Ms. Sutapa Roychoudhury, Adv. For petitioners. Mr. Soumitra Mukherjee, Adv. For respondent. Court :- proceeding under Section 148 read with Section 147 of Income Tax Act, 1961 is under challenge in present writ petition. petitioners also challenge notice under Section 271 of Act of 1971. Learned Advocate for petitioners submits that, Department sought to reopen assessment for three assessment years through notices purported to be under Section 148 of Act of 1961. He draws attention of Court to fact that, Department had made over reasons for such re-opening to petitioners and that, petitioners had replied thereto by writing dated March 7, 2016. He submits that, authority was obliged to dispose of objections before authorities proceeding to pass order of 2 assessment. He refers to impugned order of assessment and submits that, Assessing Officer has proceeded to dispose of reopened assessment without, disposing of objections raised to invocation of Section 148 of Act of 1961. impugned assessment order also does not give any ground as to why objection raised by petitioners are not acceptable. Learned Advocate appearing for Department submits that, petitioners have preferred appeal against one of interlocutory orders passed by Court in present writ petition. Such appeal is pending. I have considered rival contentions of parties and materials made available on record. It appears that, Department had invoked Section 148 of Act of 1961 in respect of three assessment years as against petitioners. Department has also supplied reasons for such invocation. petitioners had replied thereto. It was incumbent upon authorities to consider and decide objections raised by petitioners before proceeding to assess reopened assessment years. In present case, Assessing Officer did not dispose of objections raised, but proceeded to pass order of assessment after reopening assessment under Section 148. Such procedure, in my view, is not available to Assessing Officer. Assessing Officer ought to have disposed of objections raised by petitioners by reasoned order prior to Assessing Officer passing order of assessment after reopening assessment under Section 148 of Act of 1961. 3 In such circumstances, impugned order of assessment cannot be sustained. same is set aside. All consequential steps taken pursuant to in terms of impugned order of assessment including notice under Section 271 of Act of 1971 are also set aside. This order will, however, not prevent Assessing Officer from evaluating objections raised by petitioners in accordance with law. He will do so within period of four weeks from date of communication of this order to him. It is open to Assessing Officer to proceed thereafter in accordance with law. WP No. 985 of 2016 is disposed of. No order as to costs. (DEBANGSU BASAK, J.) snn. Elite Pharmaceuticals & Anr v. Income-tax Officer, Ward-46(1), Kolkata