Sh. Saurabh Dasgupta, Gurgaon V. ACIT, Gurgaon

ITA 5850/DEL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4247 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 year(s) 8 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-09-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 06-06-2017
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 29-12-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S S RANA
• Keywords: Invalid notice; Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice; Assessment record
• Section: 143(3); 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : G , NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. I.C. SUDHIR , JUDICIAL M EMBER AND SH. O.P. KANT , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 5850 /DE L/ 2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007 - 08 SH. SAURABH DASGUPTA, PROP. INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTS MFG. CO. , FLAT NO. 702, ADHUNIK CO - OP. GROUP SOCIETY LTD., PLOT NO. 8, SECTOR - 52, GURGAON VS. ACIT, CIRCLE, GURGAON PAN : AFDPD1852K (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SH. SANDEEP AHUJA, CA RESPONDENT BY SH. S.S. RANA, CIT(DR) DATE OF HEARING 09.08.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 15.09.2017 ORDER PER O.P. KANT , A. M. : THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST ORDER DATED 17/08/2011 PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX ( APPEALS) - PANCHKULA [ IN SHORT THE CIT - (A) ] FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007 - 08 , RAISING FOLLOWING GROUNDS: 1. ON THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF NO VALID SERVICE OF NOTICE U/S 143(2) WITHIN THE STATUTORY TIME, THE LD CIT (APPEALS) HAS ERRED ON FACTS AND LAW BY IGNORING THE MAIN FACT THAT THE NOTICE U/S 143(2) WAS NOT VALIDLY SERVED WITHIN THE STA TUTORY TIME AND NOT QUASHING THE ASSESSMENT WHICH IS VOID ABINITIO AS ESPECIALLY WHEN - THE ASSESSEE RECEIVED THE FIRST NOTICE U/S 143(2) DATED 30.11.2009 FOR THE ASST YEAR 2007 - 08 WITH A WRONG PAN NO. AS 2 ITA NO. 5850/DEL/2011 AFDPD1852K ALTHOUGH THE SAME WAS REQUIRED TO BE VALI DLY SERVED TO HIM WITHIN 12 MONTHS OF THE FILING OF THE RETURN I.E ON OR BEFORE 31ST OCTOBER 2008. THE EARLIER 6 NOTICES WERE ISSUED (NOT VALIDLY SERVED) TO THE ASSESSEE BY ITO WARD 1, GURGAON WHICH WERE RETURNED UNDELIVERED AND LYING IN THE ASSESSMENT REC ORDS WITH WRONG ADDRESSES OR INCOMPLETE ADDRESS MENTIONED AS : I) U - 51/ 384, DLF III, QUTAB ENCLAVE, GURGAON WHICH BEING AN ADDRESS NOT IN EXISTENCE AT ALL, AND II) DLF - III, QUTAB ENCLAVE GURGAON WHICH BEING AN INCOMPLETE ADDRESS HAVING NO PROPERTY NUMB ER OR REFERENCE. ( AS DLF III HAS THOUSANDS OF HOUSES IN ITS VICINITY) WHICH WERE FOUND ON INSPECTION BY THE COUNSEL AND CONFIRMED LATER BY THE CIT APPEAL FROM THE ASSESSMENT RECORDS. - THE ADDRESSES AS ABOVE ON WHICH THE SAID NOTICES WERE ALLEGED TO BE SERVED THROUGH AFFIXTURE COULD NOT BE POSSIBLE THERE BEING NO SUCH ADDRESSES IN GURGAON. 2. LD. CIT (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN FACTS & LAW BY ACCEPTING THE VAGUE EXPLANATION IN THE REMAND REPORT OF THE LD. ACIT DATED 28.02.2011 WHICH, WAS GIVEN AFTER SEVERAL REMINDER TO THE LD. ACIT AND AS REPRODUCED IN PARA 4 OF LD CIT (APPEAL) S ORDER AND WHERE IN THE LD. ACIT KEPT SILENCE ON THE APPELLANT S CHALLENGE OF THE ADDRESSES TO WHICH ANY VALID NOTICE WAS SERV ED OR ON WHICH THE AFFIXTURE WAS DONE AND TRIED TO AVOID ADMITTING THAT BOTH THE ADDRESSES ON WHICH THE NOTICE U/S 143(2) WERE SENT WERE EITHER WRONG OR INCOMPLETE AND NOT IN EXISTENCE. THE LD CIT ( APPEALS ) HAS IGNORED THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A REGULAR INCOME TAX ASSESEE AND ADDRESS OF THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN CORRECTLY WRITTEN ON ALL THE INCOME TAX RETURNS AND THE ASSESSMENT FOR ASST YEAR 05 - 06 WAS DONE BY THE INCOME TAX CICLE GURGAON U/S 143(3). 3. LD. CIT (APPEAL) ERRED IN LAW AND FACTS BY IGNORING THE COPIES OF THE ALLEGED INVALID NOTICES SENT BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AVAILABLE IN THE RECORDS OF THE DEPARTMENT CALLED FOR BY HER BEING PREJUDICIAL IN ACCEPTING SUCH INCOMPLETE AND VAGUELY WORDED REMAND REPORT AND ERRED IN LAW BY HOLDING NO MERIT ON THE ISSUE OF WRONG ADDRESSES AND UNLAWFULLY CONFIRMING AL LEGED NON COOPERATION BY THE ASSESSEE ON RECEIPT OF FIRST NOTICE SERVED TO HIM ON 30.11.09 AND WRONGLY & ILLEGALLY JUSTIFIED AN ASSESSMENT U/S 144 WHICH IS VOID AB - INITIO. 3 ITA NO. 5850/DEL/2011 4. IT IS THEREFORE PRAYED THAT THERE BEING UNLAWFUL ORDER BY THE LD CIT (APPEALS) WRONGLY JUSTIFYING THE FIRST NOTICE U/S 143(2) DATED 30.11.2009 AND CONFIRMING THE ASSESSMENT AND CONSEQUENT DEMAND OF RS.9937760 ON ACCOUNT OF WHIMSICAL, BASELESS, PREJUDICIAL AND UNLAWFUL ADDITION OF HORRIFYING AMOUNT OF RS.22076705 ON ESTIMATE BASIS BY ASSESSMENT U/S 144 , AGAINST THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE BEING VOID ABINITIO & BAD IN LAW THAT THE ABOVE GROUNDS OF APPEAL MAY PLEASE BE ACCEPTED & APPROPRIATE RELIEF BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE BY QUASHING THE ORDER, ANNULLING THE ASSESSMENT, CANCELLIN G CONSEQUENT DEMANDS. 2. FA CTS IN BRIEF OF THE CASE AS CULLED OUT FROM THE ORDER OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES AND THE STATEMENT OF FACT S FILED BEFORE THE LD. CIT - (A) , ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE FILED RETURN OF INCOME ON 25/10/200 7 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 27,64,870/ - . THE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY AND NOTI CE UNDER SECTION 143(2) OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT ) WAS ISSUED . THIS NOTICE WAS SENT BY SPEED POST AT FOLLOWING ADDRESS: U - 51/384, DLF - III, QUTAB ENCLAV, GURGAON 2.1 THIS NO TICE WAS ALSO AFFIXED AT THE ABOVE ADDRESS ON 29/09/2008 BY THE INSPECTOR OF THE DEPARTMENT. 2.2 IN VIEW OF NON - COMPLIANCE BY THE ASSESSEE OF THE NOTICES ISSUED , T HE ASSESSING OFFICER COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 144 OF THE ACT ON 31/12/2009 AF TER M AKING ADDITION OF RS.2,20,76, 705/ - TO THE RETURNED INCOME. 2.3 ON FURTHER APPEAL TO THE LD. CIT - (A) , THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGED TIMELY SERVICE OF VALID NOTICE UNDER SECTION 143(2) OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED TH AT : ( I ) HE HAS BEEN STAYING AT U - 79/ 10, DLF P HASE III, QUTAB ENCLAVE , GURGAON, (I.E. DIFFERENT ADDRESS) FOR LAST MANY YEARS AND IN THE RETURN OF INCOME FO R THE YEAR UNDER 4 ITA NO. 5850/DEL/2011 CONSIDERATION E - FILED ON 25/10/2007 , THE ASSESSEE MENTIONED THE SAME ADDRESS. ( II ) THE NOTICE UNDER SECTION 143(2) OF THE ACT FOR SELECTION OF THE CASE UNDER SCRUTINY WAS SERVED ON 30/11/2009 AT THE ABOVE ADDRESS , WHEREAS AS PER LAW , IT WAS REQUIRED TO BE SERVED VALIDLY BEFORE 31/10/2008 I.E. WITHIN 12 MONTHS FROM THE END OF THE MONTH IN WHICH RETURN WAS FILED. 2.4 ON THE BASIS OF THE REMAND REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THE LEARNED CIT - (A) CONCLUDED THAT THE NOTICE UNDER SECTION 143(2) OF THE ACT WAS SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE BOTH THROUGH THE SPEED POST AS WELL AS AFFIXTURE AT THE ADDRESS: U - 51/384, DLF - III, QUTAB ENCL AVE, GURGAON . HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT NOTICE WAS ALSO SERVED AT THE FOLLOWING BUSINESS PREMISE S OF THE ASSESSEE: I NDUSTRIAL P RODUCT M ANUFACTURING C OMPANY DLF III, QUTAB ENCLAVE, GURGAON. 2.5 THE LEARNED CIT - (A) FURTHER OBSERVED THAT THE NOTICE SENT BY HIM AT THE NEW ADDRESS I.E. 79/10, DLF, PHASE - 3, QUTAB E NCLAVE, GURGAON ALSO RETURNED BACK AND , THUS , ONLY INTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE WAS NON - CORPORATION. ACCORDINGLY , HE DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WITHOUT DECIDING THE MERIT OF ADDITIONS. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL RAISING THE GROUNDS AS REPRODUCED ABOVE. 3. BEFORE US, THE LEARNED COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE VEHEMENTLY ARGUED THAT THE FIRST NOTICE U/S 143(2) OF THE ACT WAS SENT AT WRONG ADDRESS, AND AFFIXED ON 29.09.2008 AT THE WRONG ADDRESS. ACCORDING TO HIM , THE SAID ADDRESS IS NOT IN EXISTENCE AND THE ASSESSEE WAS STAYING FOR A LONG PERIOD AT ANOTHER ADDRESS I.E. 79/10, DLF PHASE - III, QUTAB ENCLAVE, GURGAON. THUS, ACCORDING TO T HE LEARNED COUNSEL, THE FIRST NOTICE U/S 5 ITA NO. 5850/DEL/2011 143(2) OF THE ACT WAS NOT SERVED AT CORRECT ADDRESS WITHIN THE PERIOD OF 12 MONTHS FROM THE END OF THE MONTH, IN WHICH THE RETURN OF INCOME WAS FILED. HE SUBMITTED THAT IN ABSENCE OF VALID NOTICE THE ASSESSMENT COMP LETED U/S 143(3) IS BAD IN LAW AND VOID - AB - INITIO. 4. THE LEARNED CIT(DR), ON THE OTHER HAND, SUBMITTED THAT FIRST NOTICE U/S 143(2) WAS DULY SERVED ON THE ADDRESS PROVIDED IN PAN DATA BASE AND ALSO AFFIXED ON THAT ADDRESS WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED PERIOD OF 12 MONTHS FROM THE END OF THE MONTH, IN WHICH RETURN OF INCOME WAS FILED. HE SUBMITTED THAT NOTICE WAS ALSO SERVED BUSINESS PREMISED OF THE ASSESSEE, THEREFORE THE NOTICE WAS SERVED VALIDLY. 5 . WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD INCLUDING THE PAPER BOOK CONTAINING PAGES 1 TO 39 SUBMITTED BY THE LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE. WE HAVE ALSO PERUSED THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT RECORD PRODUCED BY THE ASSESSING OF FICER BEFORE US. 6 . AS FAR AS FACTS OF THE CASE ARE CONCERNED, THERE IS NO DISPUTE THAT NOTICE UNDER SECTION 143(2) OF THE ACT WAS SENT THROUGH SPEED POST AT THE ADDRESS U - 51/384, DLF - III, QUTAB ENCLAV, GURGAON . AS THIS NOTICE SENT BY THE SPEED POST RET URNED BACK UNDELIVERED, THE ASSESSING OFFI CER ON 29/09/2008 DIRECTED THE I NSPECTOR OF HIS OFFICE TO SERVE NOTICE THROU GH AFFIXTURE AS PROVIDED UNDER R ULE 17 OF ORDER V OF CIVIL PROCEDURE C ODE (CPC), 1908. THE I NSPECTOR AFFIXED THE NOTICE AT THE ABOVE ADDRE SS IN PRESENCE OF TWO WITNESSES AND SUBMITTED THE REPORT TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER. A PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPORT OF INSPECTOR EXTRACTED FROM THE ASSESSMENT RECORD IS PLACED ON THE FILE. THOUGH THE LD. CIT - (A) CLAIMED THAT NOTICE UNDER SECTION 143(2) OF THE ACT WAS ALSO SERVED AT TH E BUSINESS PREMISES LOCATED AT I NDUST RIAL PRODUCT MANUFACTURING C OMPANY, DLF III, QUTAB ENCLAVE, GURGAON, T HE LD. COUNSEL HAS RAISED DOUBT IN SERVICE OF NOTICE AT THIS ADDRESS , AS ACCORDING TO HIM NO PLOT NUMBER HA S BEEN MENTIONED I N THE ADDRESS . 6 ITA NO. 5850/DEL/2011 7 . FOR ADJUDICATING THE ISSUE IN DISPUTE, T HE PROVISION OF THE ACT REGARDING SERVICE OF NOTICE, IN EXISTENCE DURING RELEVANT PERIOD, IS REPRODUCED AS UNDER: SERVICE OF NOTICE GENERALLY. 282. (1) A NOTICE OR REQUISITION UNDER THIS ACT MAY BE SERVED ON THE PERSON THEREIN NAMED EITHER BY POST OR AS IF IT WERE A SUMMONS ISSUED BY A COURT UNDER THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 (5 OF 1908). (2) ANY SUCH NOTICE OR REQUISITION MAY BE ADDRESSED (A ) IN THE CASE OF A FIRM OR A HINDU UNDI VIDED FAMILY, TO ANY MEMBER OF THE FIRM OR TO THE MANAGER OR ANY ADULT MEMBER OF THE FAMILY ; (B ) IN THE CASE OF A LOCAL AUTHORITY OR COMPANY, TO THE PRINCIPAL OFFICER THEREOF ; (C ) IN THE CASE OF ANY OTHER ASSOCIATION OR BODY OF IND IVIDUALS, TO THE PRINCIPAL OFFICER OR ANY MEMBER THEREOF ; (D ) IN THE CASE OF ANY OTHER PERSON (NOT BEING AN INDIVIDUAL), TO THE PERSON WHO MANAGES OR CONTROLS HIS AFFAIRS. 8 . THUS , ACCORDING TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT NOTICE COULD BE SERV ED EITHER BY POST OR IN THE MANNER SUMMON ISSUED BY THE COURT UNDER THE C ODE OF C IVIL P ROCEDURE, 1908 ( 5 OF 1908). IN THE INSTANT CASE , THE NOTICE SENT BY SPEED POST RETURNED UNDELIVERED AND , THEREFORE , NOTI CE WAS SERVED THROUGH AFFIXTURE . AS PER ORDER V OF CPC (1908), WHEN NOTICE IS REFUSED TO BE ACCEPTED OR THE PERSON IS NOT FOUND AT THE ADDRESS THE NOTICE MAY BE SERVED THROUGH AFFIXTURES . FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE , ORDER V RULE 17 O F CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 IS REPRODUCED AS UN DER: ORDER V 1 TO 16 . 17. PROCEDURE WHEN DEFENDANT REFUSES TO ACCEPT SERVICE, OR CANNOT HE FOUND : - 7 ITA NO. 5850/DEL/2011 WHERE THE DEFENDANT OR HIS AGENT OR SUCH OTHER PERSON AS AFORESAID REFUSES TO SIGN THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT, OR WHERE THE SERVING OFFICER, AFTER USING ALL DUE AND REASONABLE DILIGENCE, CANNOT FIND THE DEFENDANT, [WHO IS ABSENT FROM HIS RESIDENCE AT THE TIME WHEN SERVICE IS SOUGHT TO BE EFFECTED ON HIM AT HIS RESIDENCE AND THERE IS NO LIKELIHOOD OF HIS BEING FOUND AT THE RESIDENCE WIT HIN A REASONABLE TIME] AND THERE IS NO AGENT EMPOWERED TO ACCEPT SERVICE OF THE SUMMONS ON HIS BEHALF, NOR ANY OTHER PERSON ON WHOM SERVICE CAN BE MADE, THE SERVING OFFICER SHALL AFFIX A COPY OF THE SUMMONS ON THE OUTER DOOR OR SOME OTHER CONSPICUOUS PART OF THE HOUSE IN WHICH THE DEFENDANT ORDINARILY RESIDES OR CARRIES ON BUSINESS OR PERSONALLY WORKS FOR GAIN, AND SHALL THEN RETURN THE ORIGINAL TO THE COURT FROM WHICH IT WAS ISSUED, WITH A REPORT ENDORSED THEREON OR ANNEXED THERETO STATING THAT HE HAS SO A FFIXED THE COPY, THE CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER WHICH HE DID SO, AND THE NAME AND ADDRESS OF THE PERSON(IF ANY) BY WHOM THE HOUSE WAS IDENTIFIED AND IN WHOSE PRESENCE THE COPY WAS AFFIXED. 9 . SINCE, THE NOTICE WAS AFFIXED AT THE PREMISE IN PRESENCE OF TWO WITN ESSES, THE AFFIXTURE AT THE ADDRESS U - 51/384, DLF - III, QUTAB ENCLAVE IS IN ACCORDANCE WITH ORDER V OF CPC, 1908. 10 . IN VIEW OF ABOVE FACTS OF THE CASE AND LEGAL POSITION, THE DISPUTE LEFT BEFORE US IS WHETHER THE NOTICE WAS SERVED AT PROPER ADDRESS. 11 . THE LD. COUNSEL HAS CLAIMED BEFORE US THAT ASSESSEE HAS BEEN STAYING AT THE ADDRESS U - 79/10 , DLF PH - III, QUTAB ENCLAV, GUR GAON FOR LAST MANY YEARS AND THE ADDRESS AT WHICH NOTICE WAS SERVED IS NOT IN EXISTENCE. WHEREAS ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. CIT ( DR ) CLAIMED THAT THE NOTICE WAS SERVED ON THE ADDRESS PROVIDED IN PAN DATA BASE AND THIS BEING ONE OF THE KNOWN ADDRESS OF THE ASSESSEE, IT WAS VALIDLY SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE. 12 . IN THIS REGARD, WE WOULD LIKE TO REFER THE RULE 127 OF THE INCOME - TAX RULES, W HICH READS AS UNDER: [SERVICE OF NOTICE, SUMMONS, REQUISITION, ORDER AND OTHER COMMUNICATION. 8 ITA NO. 5850/DEL/2011 127 .(1) FOR THE PURPOSES OF SUB - SECTION (1) OF SECTION 282, THE ADDRESSES (INCLUDING THE ADDRESS FOR ELECTRONIC MAIL OR ELECTRONIC MAIL MESSAGE) TO WHICH A NOT ICE OR SUMMONS OR REQUISITION OR ORDER OR ANY OTHER COMMUNICATION UNDER THE ACT (HEREAFTER IN THIS RULE REFERRED TO AS 'COMMUNICATION') MAY BE DELIVERED OR TRANSMITTED SHALL BE AS PER SUB - RULE (2). (2) THE ADDRESSES REFERRED TO IN SUB - RULE (1) SHALL BE (A) FOR COMMUNICATIONS DELIVERED OR TRANSMITTED IN THE MANNER PROVIDED IN CLAUSE (A) OR CLAUSE (B) OF SUB - SECTION (1) OF SECTION 282 (I) THE ADDRESS AVAILABLE IN THE PAN DATABASE OF THE ADDRESSEE; OR (II) THE ADDRESS AVAILABLE IN THE INCOME - TAX RETURN TO WHICH THE COMMUNICATION RELATES; OR (III) THE ADDRESS AVAILABLE IN THE LAST INCOME - TAX RETURN FURNISHED BY THE ADDRESSEE; OR (IV) IN THE CASE OF ADDRESSEE BEING A COMPANY, ADDRESS OF REGISTERED OFFICE AS AVAILABLE ON THE WEBSITE OF MINISTRY OF CORPORATE AFFAIRS: 1 3 . THUS, IT IS EVIDENT THAT NOTICE U/S 143(2) OF THE ACT COULD BE VALIDLY SERVED AT THE ADDRESS PROVIDED IN THE PAN DATA BASE OF THE ASSESSEE. 1 4 . WE ALSO OBSERVED THAT NOTICE ISSUED BY THE LD. CIT - (A) FIXING THE APPEAL ALSO COULD NOT BE SERVED AT THE ADDRESS PROVIDED IN THE RETURN OF INCOME I.E. 79/10, DLF, PHASE - 3, QUTAB ENCLAVE, GURGAON. THE ASSESSEE PROVIDED ANOTHER ADDRESS AS UNDER TO THE LD. CIT - (A), ON WHIC H THE IMPUGNED ORDER WAS SERVED : SH SAURABH DAS GUPTA , PROP. INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTS MANUFACTURING COMPANY BASAI ROAD, OPP: N K RUBBER FACTORY, GURGAON. 15 . IN FORM NO. 36 FILED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL , THE ASSESSEE AGAIN PROVIDED A NEW ADDRESS AS UNDER: 9 ITA NO. 5850/DEL/2011 FLAT NO. 702, ADHUNIK CO - OP GROUP HOUSING SOCIETY L TD. PLOT NO. 8 , SECTOR - 52 , GURGAON, HARYANA, 122002. 16 . WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT I N VIEW OF THE FREQUENT CHANGE IN ADDRESSES, THE ASSESSEE WAS REQUIRED TO INFORM THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO RECORD THE CHANGES IN HIS ADDRESS. THE I NCOME T AX DEPARTMENT HAS PROVIDED THE FACILITY OF CHANGE OF ADDRESS IN PERMANENT ACCOUNT NUMBER DATABAS E THROUGH FORM NO. 49A AND THE ASSESSEE CAN REQUEST FOR CHANGE OF JURISDICTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN VIEW OF THE CHANGE ADDRESS OR PLACE. 17 . IN VIEW OF RI VAL ASSERTION ON THE ISSUE OF THE KNOWN ADDRESS OF THE AS S ESSEE, IT IS IMPORTANT TO KNOW WHETHER THE ASSESSEE PROVIDED THE ADDRESS AT WHICH NOTICE WAS SERVED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER I.E. U - 51/384, DLF - III, QUTAB ENCLAV, GURGAON IN PAN DATA BASE OR IT IS THE MISTAKE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN MENTIONING THE CORRECT ADDRESS . 1 8 . IN VIEW OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE FEEL IT APPROPRIATE TO RESTORE THIS ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE LEARNED CIT - (A) FOR CARRYING OUT ENQUIRY OR VERIFICATION OF FOLLOWING: 1 . F IND OUT THE ADDRESS IN THE PAN DATABASE AND VERIFY WHETHER THE ASSESSEE PROVIDED THE ADDRESS U - 51/384, DLF - III, QUTAB ENCLAV, GURGAON AS HIS ADDRESS AT ANY POINT OF TIME. 2 . FIND OUT WHETHER THE ASSESSEE PROVIDED THIS ADDRESSES IN ANY ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING COMPLETED PRIOR TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. 3 . GET THE PHYSICAL VERIFICATION DONE OF THE EXISTENCE OF THE ADDRESS U - 51/384, DLF - III, QUTAB ENCLAV, GURGAON AND FIND OUT CONNECTION OF THE ASSESSEE WITH THE SAID ADDRESS. 10 ITA NO. 5850/DEL/2011 4 . EXAMINE THE INSPECTOR, WHO SERVED THE NOTICE U/S 143(2) OF THE ACT AT BUSINESS PREMISE OF THE ASSESSEE AND ALSO PROVIDE OPPORTUNITY OF CROSS - EXAMINING HIM TO THE ASSESSEE. 5 . ANY OTHER ENQUIRY DEEMED FIT IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES FOR FINDING VALIDITY OF SERVICE OF NOTICE UND ER SECTION 143(2) OF THE ACT ISSUED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 19 . AFTER VERIFICATION OF THE ABOVE FACTS, T HE LD. CIT - (A) IS DIRECTED TO ADJUDICATE THE ISSUE OF VALIDITY OF SERVICE OF NOTICE. IF HE FINDS NOTICE OF SERVICE AS VALID, THEN HE IS DIRECTED TO D ECIDE THE ISSUE ON MERIT OF THE ADDITION ALSO. IT IS NEEDLESS TO MENTION THAT ASSESSEE AS WELL AS ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL BE AFFORDED ADEQU ATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE ACCORDINGLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. 20 . IN THE RESULT , APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. THE DECISION IS PRONOUN CED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 15 TH SEPT. , 201 7 . SD/ - SD/ - ( I.C. SUDHIR ) ( O.P. KANT ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 15 TH SEPTEMBER , 201 7 . RK / - (D.T.D) COPY FORWARDED TO: 1 . APPELLANT 2 . RESPONDENT 3 . CIT 4 . CIT(A) 5 . DR ASST. REGISTRAR, ITAT, NEW DELHI