High Court of Calcutta: AO must address the advisor’s objections before the reassessment

Last Updated on February 13, 2025 by NewsDesk SLC

The High Court of Calcutta has argued that it is the duty of the evaluation officer (AO) to get rid of the written objection presented by the advisor for reassessment.

The bench of Chief Justice T.S Sivagnanam and Justice Bivas Pattanayak have observed that the duty issued on the evaluating officer is to decide the written objections given by the one evaluated to the proposed reopening and approve an order to speak and if the order goes against the Advisor, the advisor. The advisor has the freedom to challenge the order by presenting a request for writing, since no alternative remedy is provided by virtue of the provisions of the Income Tax Law, 1961.

The Department challenged the order approved by the Court in the appeals filed by the advisor, as well as the Department against the Order approved by the Income Tax Commissioner by which the CIT(A) affirmed the evaluation order.

Although several problems were raised before the wise court, the first problem assumed for the Court’s consideration was whether the evaluation officer was right when not getting rid of the written objection presented by the advisor for the reopening of the evaluation.
In fact, the advisor was revasted by the land before the CIT (A) that requires a remumption report, but unfortunately the evaluating officer did not present the Remunction report and the CIT (A) proceeded to make a decision on merits and Particularly it allowed the appeal of the advisor, but with respect to the percentage of the gross profit rate throughout the billing and made a restriction of it.

The Court, by dismissing the appeal of the department, said the evaluation officer did not follow the procedure established by the court in GKN TRIVESHAFTS [India] LTD.