Ankita Gupta Marriage Beneficiary Trust, Kanpur V. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Kanpur

ITA 876/LKW/2014

• Counselvise Citation: 87623714 RSA 2014
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-04-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 02-03-2015
• Assessment Year: 2000-2001
• Appeal Filed On: 01-12-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: PUNEET KUMAR
• Keywords: Period of limitation
• Section: 147; 148

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH A, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.876/LKW/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2000 - 01 A.C.I.T., RANGE - I, KANPUR. VS ANKITA GUPTA MARRIAGE BENEFICIARY TRUST OFFICER, 16/95, THE MALL KANPUR. PAN:AAATA7472N (RESPONDENT) (APPELLANT) SHRI P. K. KAPOOR, C.A. APPELLANT BY SHRI PUNEET KUMAR, D.R. RESPONDENT BY 02/03/2015 DATE OF HEARING 16 /04/2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT O R D E R PER A. K. GARODIA, A.M. THIS IS ASSESSEES APPEAL DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY LEARNED CIT(A) - II, KANPUR DATED 15/09/2014 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2000 - 2001. 2. GROUND NO. 3 IS AS UNDER: 3. BECAUSE THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 30/03/2006 IS LIABLE TO BE DECLARED AS NULL & VOID ON THE GROUND AND THE REASON THAT SAME HAD BEEN PASSED WITHOUT ISSUING MANDATORY NOTICE U/S 143(2). AS NOTICE U/S 143(2), DATED 07/03/2006 WAS ISSUED AND ALSO NOT CLEAR ON WHICH RETURN, ASSESSMENT HAS TO BE FRAMED (ORI GINAL, REVISED OR 148) WHICH IS BEYOND THE PERIOD OF LIMITATION. 3. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY LEARNED A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S 143(2) IS TIME BARRED. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE COPY OF NOTICE IS AVAILABLE ON PAGES 7 & 8 OF THE PAPER BOOK AND THE DATE OF NOTICE IS 07/03/2006. THEREAFTER, HE SUBMITTED THAT THE RETURN OF INCOME U/S 148 WAS FILED ON 11/01/2005 AS PER COPY OF 2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT AVAILABLE ON PAGE 4 OF THE PAPER BOOK. H E FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASS ESSING OFFICER COULD HAVE ISSUED NOTICE U/S 143(2) ON OR BEFORE 30 TH SEPTEMBER 2005 BUT THE NOTICE WAS ISSUED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON 07/03/2006 AND THIS FACT IS NOTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ALSO AND HENCE, NOTICE ISSUED BY TH E ASSESSING OFFICER IS TIME BARRED AND AS A CONSEQUENCE, THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FRAMED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS NOT VALID. 4. LEARNED D.R. OF THE REVENUE SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. WE FIN D THAT UNDISPUTEDLY, THE RETURN OF INCOME WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE U/S 147 IN JANUARY 2005 AND THEREFORE, AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 143(2), NOTICE SHOULD HAVE BEEN ISSUED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITHIN SIX MONTHS FROM THE END OF JANUARY 2005 . IT IS NOTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER THAT NOTICE WAS ISSUED ON 07/03/2006 AND THEREFORE, IS TIME BARRED AND IN CONSEQUENCE , THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FRAMED BY HIM IS NOT VALID. WE, THEREFORE, QUASH THE SAME. THIS GROUND IS ALLOWED. 6. IN VIEW OF OUR DECISION, OTHER GROUNDS DO NOT CALL FOR ANY ADJUDICATION. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED. (ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE) SD/. SD/. (SUNIL KUMAR YADAV) ( A. K. GARODIA ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 16 /04/2015 *C.L.SINGH COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1.THE APPELLANT 2.THE RESPONDENT. 3.CONCERNED CIT 4.THE CIT(A) 5.D.R., I.T.A.T., LUCKNOW ASSTT. REGISTRA R