ANIL KUMAR MANRAI ,MUMBAI V. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 22(1), MUMBAI

ITA 1419/MUM/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Anil Kumar Manrai, the appellant, who appealed against the order of the ld. CIT(A) pertaining to the assessment year 2012-13. The primary issues raised by the appellant included the validity of the notice issued under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the levy of interest under sections 234B and 234C. The assessment was initially reopened due to the non-filing of the return by the assessee, followed by the issuance of a notice under section 148. The AO conducted an ex-parte assessment, leading to a significant increase in the declared income. The ld. CIT(A) found the ex-parte assessment to be improper and set it aside for a fresh assessment, which led to the current appeal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 707024 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 28-02-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ADITYA M. RAI; DR
• Assessee Lawyers: NIKHIL PORWAL; ARS
• Keywords: Set aside; Competent authority
• Section: 147; 148; 144; 142(1); 234B

Judgement Text

"| आयकर अपील य अ धकरण यायपीठ, मुंबई | IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 1419/Mum/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Anil Kumar Manrai B 904 ARIISTO Sapphire 2nd Hasnabad Lane Santacruz (West) Mumbai - 400054 [PAN: AALPM0153D] Vs ACIT, Circle – 22(1), Mumbai अपीलाथ\u0012/ (Appellant) \u0014\u0015 यथ\u0012/ (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Nikhil Porwal, A/Rs Revenue by : Shri Aditya M. Rai, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क तार ख/Date of Hearing : 03/07/2025 घोषणा क तार ख /Date of Pronouncement: 07/07/2025 आदेश/O R D E R PER NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, AM: This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order dated 27/01/2025 by NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter “the ld. CIT(A)”] pertaining to AY 2012-13. 2. The substantial grievance raised by the assessee is as under:- “1. The Learned Appellant Officer erred in ignoring the ground of appeal to treat the order passed u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 as void ab initio for non-issuance of notice u/s 148 within the time limit prescribed u/s 149 and also non issuance of valid notice u/s 143(2) and 142(1) as per Rule 127. 2. The Learned Appellant Officer erred in levying interest u/s 234B & 234C. 3. The Appellant craves leave to alter, amend or add to any of the above grounds.” 3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee did not file his return of income and the assessment was reopened by issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act dated 30/03/2019 after taking approval from Competent Authority. I.T.A. No. 1419/Mum/2025 2 4. In response to the said notice, the assessee filed return of income on 09/04/2019 declaring the income at Rs. 3,22,340/-. Statutory notices were issued and served upon the assessee and the assessment order was framed on 21/12/2019 u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act assessing total income at Rs. 2,41,73,650/-. The assessee challenged the assessment before the ld. CIT(A) specifically questioning the validity of the notice u/s 148 of the Act. 5. Taking a leaf out of the amendment by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2024 w.e.f. 01/10/2024, the ld. CIT(A) was convinced that the assessment made by the AO u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act being ex-parte assessment made without affording adequate opportunity to the assessee and accordingly, it found it to be a fit case to be set aside and referred back to the AO for making a fresh assessment. 6. We are of the considered view that once the assessment order has been set aside back to the file of the AO for fresh assessment, then any grievance relating to the notice issued u/s 148 of the Act should be taken before the AO himself as he is the primary officer. Therefore, we do not find any reason to interfere with the findings of the ld. CIT(A). 7. In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the Court on 7th July, 2025 at Mumbai. Sd/- Sd/- (SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL) (NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai, Dated 07/07/2025 *SC SrPs *SC SrPs *SC SrPs *SC SrPs I.T.A. No. 1419/Mum/2025 3 आदेश क \u0016\u0017त\u0018ल\u001aप अ े\u001aषत /Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ! / The Appellant 2. \u0016\"यथ! / The Respondent 3. संबं&धत आयकर आयु(त / Concerned Pr. CIT 4. आयकर आयु(त ) अपील ( / The CIT(A)- 5. \u001aवभागीय \u0016\u0017त\u0017न&ध ,आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मुंबई /DR,ITAT, Mumbai, 6. गाड. फाई/ Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, TRUE COPY Assistant Registrar आयकर अपील य अ&धकरण ITAT, Mumbai "