COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, FARIDABAD V. JOGINDER KAUR

ITA/541/2010

AI Insights

The case involves the Commissioner of Income Tax as the appellant and Smt. Joginder Kaur as the respondent, concerning block assessment for the period from June 30, 1989, to November 31, 1997. The primary legal contention revolves around the validity of a notice issued under section 158BD of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) had declared void due to insufficient notice period provided to the assessee. The appellant challenged this decision, arguing that the notice, despite its procedural flaws, was substantively in compliance with the Act's intent and purpose, as supported by section 292B of the Act.

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 744629 (HC-CHANDIGARH)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 04-04-2011
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: CIT v. Sh. Sh. Naveen Verma
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: RAJIV SHARMA
• Assessee Lawyers: URVASHI DHUGGA
• Keywords: Block assessment; Notice validity; Procedural Compliance; Assessment quashing
• Section: 158BD; 292B; 260-A

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. I.T.A. No.541 of 2010 Date of decision: 4.4.2011 Commissioner of Income Tax -----Appellant. Vs. Smt. Joginder Kaur. -----Respondent and connected appeals being ITA Nos.667, 669 and 670 of 2010 CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL Present:- Mr. Urvashi Dhugga, Sr. Standing Counsel for the appellant. Mr. Rajiv Sharma, Advocate for the respondent. --- ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J. This order will dispose of I.T.A. Nos.541, 667, 669 and 670 of 2010 as all the four appeals involve same questions. I.T.A. No.541 of 2010 has been preferred by the revenue under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “the Act”) against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi dated 19.1.2010 in ITA No.207/Del/2005 for the block assessment from 30.6.1989 to 31.11.1997 claiming following substantial questions of law:- I.T.A. No.541 of 2010 “I. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. ITAT was right in law in holding that the notice issued u/s 158BD by the Assessing Officer without giving 15 clear days time to the assessee to file the block return is ab initio void and invalid and accordingly, the assessment order made by the Assessing Officer u/s 158BD in pursuance to the said illegal notice is also illegal and invalid disregarding the fact that the assessee himself had filed the return on 10-03-2003 in response to notice u/s 158BD dated 09-03-2001 i.e. after a considerable gap of time and after issue of various notices by the Assessing Officer? II. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. ITAT was right in law in declaring the proceedings pursuant to the notice as illegal and invalid despite the specific saver provided under the Act by way of section 292B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 without even considering and discussing the said section because in view of section 292B the Ld. ITAT should have set aside the case if certain procedural at the time of service of notice remained to be followed as the service of notice u/s 158BD was in substance and effect in conformity with the intent and purpose of the Act?” III. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. ITAT was right in law in quashing the assessment order made u/s158BD of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and not deciding the issues involved in the case on merit by holding that since the assessment has been quashed, the various grounds raised by the revenue in its appeal have become redundant at this stage and hence do not call for any adjudication?” 2 I.T.A. No.541 of 2010 Learned counsel for the parties state that the matter is covered by judgment of this Court dated 1.2.2011 in I.T.A. No.558 of 2006 in CIT v. Sh. Sh. Naveen Verma. Accordingly, these appeals are allowed in same terms and the matter is remanded to the Tribunal for fresh decision in accordance with law. Parties may appear before the Tribunal for further proceedings on July 04, 2011. The appeals are disposed of. A photocopy of this order be placed on the file of each connected case. (ADARSH KUMAR GOEL) JUDGE April 04, 2011 ( AJAY KUMAR MITTAL ) ashwani JUDGE 3 "