Kishor Ganpat Karande, Jalna V. Income-tax Officer, Ward - 2, Jalna

ITA 1820/PUN/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8032 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-01-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 20-12-2019
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 27-11-2018
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S P WALIMBE
• Section: 143(3); 143(1); 143(2); 148

Judgement Text

, - IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH SMC, PUNE . , BEFORE SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM . / ITA NO.1820/PUN/2018 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10 KISHOR GANPAT KARANDE, ANITA SADAN BHOKARDAN ROAD, JALNA-431203. PAN : ABWPK9224B ....... / APPELLANT / V/S. ITO, WARD-2, JALNA. / RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : SHRI S. N. PURANIK REVENUE BY : SHRI S. P. WALIMBE / DATE OF HEARING : 20.12.2019 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 15.01.2020 / ORDER PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM: THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A)-1, AURANGABAD DATED 10.08.2018 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. 2. BEFORE ME, AT THE OUTSET, LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE INFORMED THAT THE REASSESSMENT MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON 17.03.2016 U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 OF THE ACT IS BARRED BY LIMITATION. ACCORDING TO HIM, THE ASSESSMENT SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE ON 31.03.2015, WHICH IS DUE DATE FOR COMPLETION OF THE REASSESSMENT. IN THIS REGARD, LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE BROUGHT MY ATTENTION TO THE NOTICE DATED 27.03.2014 ISSUED U/S 148 OF THE ACT, PLACED AT PAGE 1 OF THE PAPER BOOK, AND SUBMITTED THAT THE REASSESSMENT SHOULD HAVE BEEN MADE BY 31.03.2015. ITA NO.1820/PUN/2018 - 2 - 3. ON HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES ON THIS LIMITED ISSUE, I AM OF THE OPINION THAT THE NOTICE DATED 27.03.2014 WAS SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE ON 29.03.2014 WHICH IS EVIDENT FROM THE PAPER BOOK AT PAGE NO.1, THE TIME LIMIT PROVIDED U/S 153(2) OF THE ACT, SUPPORTS THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE. IN THIS REGARD, WE PERUSED THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS FURNISHED BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE BEFORE ME AND FIND IT RELEVANT TO EXTRACT THE SAME AND THE SAME ARE EXTRACTED HEREUNDER :- ASSESSMENT ORDER IS TIME BARRED ASSESSING OFFICER ISSUED NOTICE U/S.148 DATED 27/03/2014 AND SERVED ON 29.03.2014 AND ASSESSMENT ORDER 17/3/2016, WHICH IS TIME BARRED U/S 153(2) WHICH WAS REQUIRED TO BE PASSED BEFORE 31/3/2015. ASSESSMENT ORDER IS BAD IN LAW. A. ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED RETURN IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE U/S. 148, HE ONLY SUBMITTED INTIMATION U/S 143(1) PROCESSED ON ORIGINAL RETURN, TO MEET THE CHARGE BY ASSESSING OFFICER THAT NO RETURN IS FILED BEFORE ISSUE OF NOTICE U/S. 148. ASSESSING OFFICER HAS COMPLETED ASSESSMENT U/S. 143(3) R.W.S. 148 AND ISSUED NOTICE U/S. 143(2) WITHOUT HAVING FILED THE RETURN. ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT ACQUIRED JURISDICTION TO ASSESS U/S. 143(3) AND SHOULD HAVE ASSESSED U/S. 144. APPELLANT RELIES ON THE MUMBAI ITAT DECISION IN S. KUMAR ENTERPRISES (SYNFABS) V/S JT. CIT. 24 CCH 488 WHICH HELD THAT IN THE ABSENCE OF VALID RETURN ON THE DATE OF NOTICE U/S. 143(2), SUCH NOTICE AND CONSEQUENTIAL ASSESSMENT U/S. 143(3) AND ADDITION MADE ARE INVALID AND SUCH INVALIDITY IS NOT CURABLE U/S. 292B. APPELLANT PRAYS TO HOLD THAT THE ASSESSMENT ORDER & ADDITIONS OF CAPITAL GAIN ARE INVALID, BAD IN LAW AND WITHOUT JURISDICTION. B. WITHOUT ACCEPTING, THAT RETURN IS SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE U/S. 148, HOWEVER, IF DEPARTMENT CONTENTS SO AND SO DECIDED, THEN APPELLANTS REQUEST FOR GIVING COPY OF REASONS RECORDED HAS NOT BEEN ACCEDED AND SAME IS NOT GIVEN TO ASSESSEE, THEREFORE THE ORDER IS BAD IN LAW RELYING ON JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT DECISIONS IN THE CASE OF VIDESH SANCHAR NIGAM 340 ITR 66 (BOMBAY) AND TREND ELECTRONICS, (BOMBAY) (379 ITR 456). 4. CONSIDERING THE ABOVE LEGAL POSITION ON THIS ISSUE, I AM OF THE OPINION THAT THE REASSESSMENT MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS NOT VALID. ACCORDINGLY, THE RELEVANT LEGAL GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ITA NO.1820/PUN/2018 - 3 - 5. CONSIDERING THE RELIEF GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE ON THE LEGAL ISSUE, THE ADJUDICATION OF THE OTHER MERIT RELATED GROUNDS BECOMES ACADEMIC EXERCISE ONLY. THUS, THE OTHER MERIT RELATED GROUNDS ARE DISMISSED AS ACADEMIC. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 15 TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2020. SD/- (D. KARUNAKARA RAO) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / PUNE; DATED : 15 TH JANUARY, 2020. SUJEET / COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT; 2. / THE RESPONDENT; 3. THE CIT(A)-1, AURANGABAD; 4. THE PR. CIT-1, AURANGABAD; 5. , , - / DR SMC, ITAT, PUNE; 6. / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY , / ITAT, PUNE