DCIT 24(2), MUMBAI V. RAVI P. ARORA, MUMBAI

ITA 1085/MUM/2011

• Counselvise Citation: 108519914 RSA 2011
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 8 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-10-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2002-2003
• Appeal Filed On: 07-02-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S K SINGH
• Keywords: Block assessment
• Section: 148

Judgement Text

, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,MUMBAI - D BENCH. . .. . . .. . , ,, , !'# !'# !'# !'# , ' ' ' ' BEFORE S/SH.I.P.BANSAL, JUDICIAL MEM BER & RAJENDRA,ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ././ ./ ITA NO.1085/MUM/2011, % & % & % & % &/ // / ASSESSMENT YEAR-2002-03 DCIT 24(2) R.NO. 601, 6 TH FLOOR, PRATYAKSHKAR BHAVAN, BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX, BANDRA (E) MUMBAI-40051 VS. RAVI P.ARORA 1 MANGAL GYAN APARTMENTS, 12 TH ROAD, KHAR (W) MUMBAI-400052 PAN: AABPA9758Q ( '( / // / APPELLANT ) ( )*'( / RESPONDENT ) % +, - ' % +, - ' % +, - ' % +, - ' / // / APPELLANT BY : NONE ! . - ' / REVENUE BY : SHRI S.K.SINGH % . , % . , % . , % . , / // / DATE OF HEARING : 09-10-2013 /0& . , / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 09-10-2013 % % % % , 1961 1961 1961 1961 . . . . 254 254 254 254( (( (1 11 1) )) )' ,9, ': ' ,9, ': ' ,9, ': ' ,9, ': ORDER U/S.254(1)OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT,1961(ACT) PER RAJENDRA,AM: CHALLENGING THE ORDER DATED 26.06.2010 OF THE CIT(A )-34,MUMBAI,ASSESSING OFFICER(AO)HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD.CIT(A) ERRED IN QUASHING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR NON-ISSUANCE OF NOTICE U/S.143 (2), WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT THE STATUTO RY NOTICE CAN BE ISSUED ONCE THE RETURN IS FILED AND I N THIS CASE THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO FILE RETURN IN R ESPONSE TO NOTICE ISSUED U/S. 148. 2.THE APPELLANT PRAYS THAT THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) ON THE GROUND BE SET ASIDE AND MATTER MAY BE DECIDE D ACCORDING TO LAW. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO AME ND OR ALTER ANY GROUND OR ADD NEW GROUND WHICH MAY BE NECESSARY. 2. EFFECTIVE GROUND OF APPEAL IS ABOUT QUASHING OF ASS ESSMENT ORDER BY THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY(FAA).ASSESSEE AN INDIVIDUAL HAD FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME ON 18.10.2002 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.3.64 LACS.AO ISSUED A NOTICE U/S.148 OF THE ACT ON 30.03. 2009 AS HE WAS OF THE OPINION THAT TAXABLE INCOME HAD ES CAPED ASSESSMENT.VIDE HIS ORDER DATED10.12.2009,AO FINALISED THE ASSESSMENT U/S.144 R.W.S.147 OF THE ACT AND DETERMIN-ED THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AT RS.8.63 LACS. ASSESSEE FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE FAA AND RAISED THE ISSUE OF NON ISSUANCE OF NOTICE U/S.143(2)OF THE ACT.HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE RE-ASSESSMENT WAS INVALID AS AO HAD ISSUED ANY NOTICE U/S.143(2).IN ORDER TO VERIFY THE STATUS OF ISSUANCE OF NOTICE U/S. 143(2), HE DIRECTED THE AO TO SUBMIT A REPORT AS TO WHETHER AN Y NOTICE U/S.143(2) HAD BEEN ISSUED AND SERVED ON THE APPELLANT OR NOT.VIDE HIS REMAND REPO RT DATED 13/10/2010,AO CONFIRMED THAT IN THE INSTANT CASE NO NOTICE U/S.143(2) WAS ISSUED FOR THE REASON THAT NO RETURN WAS 2 ITA NO. 1085/MUM/2011 RAVI P.ARORA SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE U/S.148 IN THE INST ANT CASE.FAA HELD THAT THERE WAS NO DISPUTE THAT NOTICE U/S.143(2)HAS NOT BEEN ISSUED.R EFERRING TO THE DECISION OF THE K BENCH OF ITAT MUMBAI PRONOUNCED IN THE CASE OF CHANDRA R. GANDHI (18DTR (MUM TRIB)165),HE FURTHER HELD THAT ASSESSMENT MADE IN THE ABSENCE OF SERVICE OF NOTICE U/S.143 (2)OF THE ACT WAS INVALID, THAT AMENDMENT TO SECTI ON 148 AND SECTION 292 BB WERE OF NO HELP TO THE AO.FINALLY,HE HELD THAT REASSESSMENT ORDER WAS INVALID, THAT BEFORE FINALISING ANY ASSESSMENT /REASSESSMENT/BLOCK ASSESSMENT A NO TICE U/S. 143(2) HAD TO BE ISSUED TO MAKE THE ASSESSMENT VALID IN VIEW OF THE DECISION O F HONBLE SUPREME COURT DELIVERED IN THE CASE OF HOTEL BLUE MOON. 3. BEFORE US,DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE(DR)SUBMITTED THAT NOTICE U/S.148 WAS NOT ISSUED AS NO RETURN WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE,THAT NOTICE U/S.142(1)WAS ISSUED.NO ONE APPEARED BEFORE US,ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. AFTER CONSIDERING THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE DR WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE ORDER OF THE FAA DOES NOT S UFFER FROM ANY LEGAL INFIRMITY.AOS ARE SUPPOSED TO ISSUE NOTICES UNDER SECTION 143(2)OF TH E ACT TO THE ASSESSEES,SO THAT THEY BECOME AWARE OF THE ACTION TAKEN BY THE AOS.IN ABSE NCE OF SUCH A NOTICE ASSESSEE WILL ALWAYS REMAIN IN DARK ABOUT THE ACTION INITIATED BY THE DEPARTMENT.WE FIND THAT THE ISSUE IS DIRECTLY COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE D ECISION OF THE COORDINATE BENCH DELIVERED IN THE CASE OF CHANDRA R.GANDHI (SUPRA). RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE SAME WE UPHOLD THE ORDER OF THE FAA.EFFECTIVE GROUND OF APPEAL FILED BY THE AO IS DECIDED AGAINST HIM. AS A RESULT,APPEAL FILED BY THE AO STANDS DISMISSED. + ; % +, . %!< . !, =>. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN TH E OPEN COURT ON 9 TH OCTOBER,2013 . ': . /0& ' ? @% AB < 9 , 2013 0 . 9 E SD/- SD/- ( . .. . . / I.P.BANSAL ) ( !'# !'# !'# !'# / RAJENDRA) / JUDICIAL MEMBER ' ' ' ' /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / MUMBAI, @% /DATE: 09.10. 2013 SK ': . ),F G'F&, ': . ),F G'F&, ': . ),F G'F&, ': . ),F G'F&,/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. ASSESSEE / '( 2. RESPONDENT / )*'( 3. THE CONCERNED CIT(A)/ H I , 4. THE CONCERNED CIT/ H I 5. DR D BENCH, ITAT, MUMBAI / FJ9 ),% , ... 6. GUARD FILE/ 9 K *F, ), *F, ), *F, ), *F, ), //TRUE COPY// ':% / BY ORDER, L/= ! DY./ASST. REGISTRAR , /ITAT, MUMBAI