Ashwani Kumar, New Delhi V. ITO, Ward- 67(3), New Delhi

ITA 3803/DEL/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4075 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-10-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 12-06-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: T VASANTHAN
• Assessee Lawyers: GAUTAM JAIN SHRI LALIT MOHAN
• Section: 148

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI SMC BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI B.P. JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 3803 /DEL/201 7 [A.Y. 20 1 2 - 1 3 ] SHRI ASHWANI KUMAR VS. THE I.T. O 211, PRAGATI APARTMENT WARD 1( 1 ) PUNJABI BAGH CL UB, CLUB ROAD NOIDA NEW DELHI PAN : AAAPM 0726 H [APPELLANT] [RESPONDENT] DATE OF HEARING : 1 0 . 1 0.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 18 . 1 0.2017 ASSESSEE BY : SHRI GAUTAM JAIN SHRI LALIT MOHAN, CA REVENUE BY : SHRI T. VASANTHAN SR. DR ORDER THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ARISES FROM THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) - 32 , N EW DELHI VIDE ORDER DATED 31 . 0 3 .201 7 FOR A SSESSMENT YEAR A.Y. 201 2 - 1 3 . 2. AT THE VERY OUTSET, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS AGITATED THAT NO NOTICE U/S 143(2) OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT, 1961 [HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS 'THE ACT' FOR SHORT] WAS ISSUED AND SERVED UPON HT 2 ASSESSEE. THE LD. CI T(A), IN FACT, REJECTED THE LEGAL GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE. 3 . I HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD . RETURN OF INCOME IN THE PRESENT CASE WAS FILED DECLARING RS. 9,68,230/ - 0N 31.07.2012 AND NOTICE U/S 148 OF T HE ACT WAS ISSUED ON 14.07.2014. RETURN OF INCOME WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE U/S 148 OF THE ACT ON 10.06.2015 AND ORDER U/S 147/148 OF THE ACT WAS DATED 08.02.2016 AND NO NOTICE U/S 143(2) OF THE ACT WAS SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE AFTER FILING OF THE RETURN, THOUGH NOTICE U/S 143(2) OF THE ACCT SHOULD HAVE BEEN SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE AFTER FILING RETURN ON 10.06.2015 WHICH, IN FACT, HAS BEEN MADE THE FOUNDATION FOR FRAMING THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT. IN SUCH FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE C ASE, ASSESSMENT MADE IS ABSOLUTELY ILLEGAL AND INVALID . THIS SETTLED LEGAL POSITION STANDS COVERED BY VARIOUS DECISIONS OF THE HON'BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT OF DELHI, FEW OF WHICH ARE AS UNDER: I) 341 ITR 247 ALPINE ELECTRONICS ASIA [P] LTD VS. DGIT II) 323 ITR 249 DIT VS. SOCIETY FOR WORLDWIDE INTERBANK FINANCIAL TELECOMMUNICATION. III) ITA NO. 696/2015 CIT VS. DELHI KALYAN SAMITI. 3 IV) 383 ITR 455 PR. CIT VS. SILVER LINE AND ANR V) 282 CTR 435 PR. CIT VS. SHRI JAI SHIV SHANK AR TRADERS VI) 310 ITR 300 AT KUBER TOBACCO PRODUCTS [P] LTD VS. DCIT VII) 178 TAXMAN 315 CIT VS. MANI KAKKAR 4 . IN THAT VIEW OF THE MATTER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER DOES NOT ACQUIRE JURISDICTION U/S 147/143(2) OF THE ACT AND THEREFORE, ASSESSMENT SO M ADE IS BAD AND INVALID UNDER THE LAW AND DIRECTED TO BE QUASHED. LEGAL GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. 5 . SINCE THE ASSESSEE SUCCEEDS ON THE LEGAL GROUND, I DO NOT DECIDE THE OTHER GROUNDS ON MERITS. THUS, THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAIS ED BY THE AS SESSEE ARE ALLOWED . 6 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOW ED . THE ORDER IS PRO NOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 18 . 1 0.2017. SD/ - [B.P. JAIN] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 18 TH OCTOBER , 2017 V L/ 4 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1 . APPELLANT 2 . RESPONDENT 3 . CIT 4 . CIT(A) 5 . DR ASST. REGISTRAR, ITAT, NEW DELHI