ITA No.91 of 2019 [1] 106 IN HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA No.91 of 2019 Date of Decision: 27.02.2020 Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Gurgaon Appellant Versus Prahalad Singh Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN Present: Mr. Tajender K. Joshi, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. Vikram Bali, Jr. Standing Counsel for appellant. AJAY TEWARI, J. (Oral) [1] This appeal has been filed under Section 260A of Income Tax Act, 1961 [for brevity 'the Act'] against order dated 11.05.2018 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi, whereby appeal filed by assessee was allowed. assessment year involved is 2011-12. [2] Brief facts of case are that assessee had offered some income for tax. assessment was complete under Section 143(1) of Act but subsequently notice under section 148 was given. What weighed with Tribunal was that reasons recorded under Section 147 of Act to reach belief that income and escaped assessment was unsigned and undated and consequently, Tribunal set aside proceedings on this ground. Following questions have been framed: A. Whether on facts and in circumstances of case, Hon'ble ITAT was justified in quashing assessment order passed in re-assessment by treating notice issued u/s 148 of Act as invalid on ground that reasons recorded are unsigned which is not justified because assessee neither obtained copy of reasons recorded nor submitted any objection against validity of notice u/s 148 of Act as per guidelines contained in decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of M/S GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. Vs. Income Tax Officer 259 ITR 19 (SC) before Assessing Officer before completion of re-assessment proceedings? B. Whether on facts and in circumstances of case, Hon'ble ITAT was justified in quashing reassessment proceedings without appreciating fact that assessee himself admitted long term capital gain in return of income filed in compliance to notice issued u/s 148? C. Whether on facts and in cicumstances of case, Hon'ble ITAT was justified in admitting fresh evidence as well as accepting copy of reasons obtained by assessee under RTI Act, 2005 on 02/06/2016 after completion of re-assessment on 31/03/2016 which is personal information under RTI Act, 2005 and not documentary evidence? D. Whether on facts and in circumstances of case, Hon'ble ITAT was justified cin accepting assessee's argument that land sold during relevant previous year was not capital asset without appreciating fact that assessee himself had admitted long terms capital gain on sale of such land in return filed u/s 148 and it was capital asset? [4] primary question which has to be decided is Question A. [5] We find that order of Tribunal is correct. mere fact that reasons exist on file cannot sanctify them and only way to ascertain whether requirements under Section 147 of Act have been met out would be at very least that assessing officer sign same. Without signatures, document becomes anonymous piece of paper to which no credence can be given. action under Section 147 of Act is quasi-judicial action and if it is permitted that such action can be done as anonymously, it would have very serious consequences in other cases also. If Court accepts such pieces of paper who can tomorrow stop assessee from substituting signed paper with another unsigned paper? [6] Moreover reasons are undated, hence do not establish that they were recorded prior to issuance of notice. [7] In circumstances, appeal is dismissed. [8] Since appeal is dismissed, pending application, if any, stands disposed of. [AJAY TEWARI] JUDGE [AVNEESH JHINGAN] JUDGE February 27, 2020 pankaj baweja 1. Whether speaking/ reasoned : Yes / No 2. Whether reportable : Yes / No Pr. Commissioner of Income-tax, Gurgaon v. Prahalad Singh