Ramkumar, J.

In this Appeal filed under Sec. 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) the Revenue assails the order dated 27-7-2005 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench in I.T.A.No.117/Coch.2005.

2. As per the impugned order the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal party allowed respondent/assessees’s appeal holding that the notice issued by the Assessing Officer to the assessee under Sec.148 of the Act is void ab initio and consequently set aside the re-assessment proceedings initiated against the assessee under Sec.147 of the Act.

3. The substantial questions of law formulated in the memorandum of appeal are the following: -

“I) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and the satisfaction contemplated under the statute being prior to and for the issue of notice under Sec.148 of the I.T. Act and the same (satisfaction having been found by the CIT (A) on the perusal of the reasons recorded in the miscellaneous records (vide paragraph 4 of the order of CIT (A) the Tribunal is right in law and fact in holding that there is nothing on record to show that the Assessing Officer had applied his mind and is not the finding perverse and without application of mind to materials on record?

ii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal is right in law and fact-

i) In interfering with the re-assessment;

ii) In holding that the proceedings initiated against the assessee under Sec.147 are bad in law?

iii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case should not the Tribunal have considered in issue of satisfaction and the validity of initiation of re-assessment in the light of the reasons recorded prior to initiation of reassessment and is not the approach to the issue of satisfaction based on remarks in the assessment order against law, logic, perverse and vitiated?”

4. We heard Sr. Adv. Sri. P.K. Raveendranatha Menon, the learned counsel appearing for the Revenue and Adv. Sri, Dale P. Kurian, the learned Counsel appearing for the assessee.

THE STAND OF THE ASSESSEE

5. With a view to persuade us to confirm the order of the Income Appellate Tribunal, Adv. Sri. Dale Kurian made the following submissions before me: -

Assessment in respect of the assessee under Sec.143 (3) of the Act had initially being completed on the basis of a return filed by him showing his income pursuant to a notice issued under Sec.142 of the Act by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Inv. Circle-I, Calicut. Reassessment proceedings against the assessee under Sec.147 of the Act were initiated by the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, R2, Kozhikode acting under the directions and instruction of the Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle – 2(1), Calicut as per Annexure – F letter dated 30-5-2003. As per the provisions of Sec.147 of the Act it is the Assessing Officer who is invested with the power to invoke the said provision for reassessment and that too after complying with the mandatory requirements which include a notice under Sec.148 of the Act. Before issuing such notice, the Assessing Officer himself has to apply his mind and form an opinion regarding his reasons for initiating proceedings under Sec.147. When it is for the Assessing Officer to form the requisite opinion on being satisfied that about the existence of reasons for his belief that income has escaped assessment, his independent judgment cannot be allowed to be influenced at the instance of his official superior. In other words in a case as the present, where the original authority does something acting under the dictation of his superior, his action will be tainted with illegality thereby rendering the proceedings null and void. But for the direction of the Commissioner of Income Tax in Annexure ‘F’ letter dated 30-5-2003, the Deputy Commissioner would not have issued the notice under Sec.148 of the Act. Hence the consequential action for re-assessment of income initiated by the Deputy Commissioner of Incom