The DCIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad V. Amantha Healthcare Limited( Formerly known as Marck Biosciences Ltd.,), Ahmedabad

MA 216/AHD/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 112 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0780 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 10-12-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 09-08-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NK GOEL
• Assessee Lawyers: S N DIVETIA
• Keywords: Retrospective amendment; Block assessment; Reassessment proceedings
• Section: 292BB; 143(2); 113

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD A BENCH (BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) M.A. NO: 216/AHD/2018 (IN ITA NO. 1506/AHD/2014) (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2005-06) THE DCIT CIRCLE-4, AHMEDABAD V/S MARCK BIOSCIENCES LTD. 5 TH FLOOR, HERITAGE, NEAR GUJARAT VIDHYA PITH, USMANPURA, AHMEDABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN: AABCM 0366P APPELLANT BY : SHRI N.K. GOEL, SR. D.R. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI S.N. DIVETIA, A.R. ( )/ ORDER DATE OF HEARING : 04 -10-201 9 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 10 -12-2019 PER MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER 1. THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION HAS BEEN FILED ON BE HALF OF THE REVENUE AND FOLLOWING CONTENTIONS HAVE BEEN MENTIONED THEREIN: ON PERUSAL OF THE ORDER, IT IS FOUND THAT THE HON BLE ITAT HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE DEPARTMENT BY HOLDING THAT THE NOTICE U/S 143(2) OF THE ACT HAS BEEN ISSUED BY THE AO PRIOR TO THE DATE OF FILING O F THE RETURN AND NOTICE ISSUED M.A. NO 216/ AHD/2018 . A.Y. 2005-06 2 BEFORE FILING OF THE RETURN OF INCOME HAS NO MEANIN G AND DESERVES TO BE TREATED AS INVALID. THE HON'BLE ITAT FURTHER HELD THAT THE ASSESSMENT HAS BEEN COMPLETED WITHOUT ISSUING A VALID NOTICE U/S 143(2) OF THE AC T AND THEREFORE THE ASSESSMENT HAS TO BE TREATED AS INVALID AND DISSERVES TO BE AN NULLED. 3. THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE ITAT IS NOT ACCEPTAB LE IN VIEW OF THE SECTION 292BB OF THE ACT. AS PER SECTION 292BB OF THE ACT. ASSESS MENT CANNOT BE ANNULLED, IF NO OBJECTION REGARDING VALID SERVICE OF NOTICE WAS TAK EN BEFORE COMPLETION OF ASSESSMENT. IN THE INSTANT CASE, THE ASSESSEE DID N OT RAISE ANY OBJECTION WITH REGARDS TO NOTICE U/S 142(2). FROM THE CASE RECORD, IT IS EVIDENT THAT THE AR OF THE ASSESSEE ATTENDED THE OFFICE FROM TIME TO TIME AND SUBMITTED THE DETAILS AS CALLED FOR DURING THE REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. AS SUCH THE ASSESSEE WAS QUITE AWARE OF THE PROCEEDINGS AND HE DID NOT OBJECT THE PROCEEDINGS AT ANY STAGE WHICH HE COULD HAVE DONE. ATTENDING OF HEARING AND FURNISHING OF SUBMISSION ITSELF PROVES THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NO OBJECTION FO R REASSESSMENT. 4. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICAT ION IS BEING FILED AND THE HON'BLE ITAT IS REQUESTED TO KINDLY RECALL ITS EARL IER ORDER IN THIS CASE DATED 14.02.2018 AND KINDLY CONSIDER FOLLOWING GROUND: 'THE HON'BLE ITAT HAS ERRED IN NOT CONSIDERING THE P ROVISIONS OF SECTION 292BB AS THE ASSESSEE ATTENDED DURING THE REASSESSMENT PROCE EDINGS BEFORE THE AO WITHOUT RAISING ANY OBJECTION REGARDING NOTICE U/S 143(2) AND RAISED THE GROUND OF NON-ISSUANCE OF NOTICE U/S 143(2) OF THE ACT FOR THE FIRST TIME BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A).' 5. THE COPY OF APPROVAL LETTER OBTAINED FROM THE PR . CIT/(1), AHMEDABAD ALONG WITH A COPY OF ITATS ORDER IS ENCLOSED HEREWITH. 2. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSION AND WE DO NOT FIND ANY MERIT IN THE MISC. APPLICATION FILED BY ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE . 3.WE DRAW SUPPORT FROM THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COUR T IN THE MATTER OF CIT-III VS. PANORAMA BUILDERS (P.) LTD. [2014] 45 TAXMANN.C OM 159 (GUJ.) WHEREIN HONBLE HIGH COURT AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 292BB, READ WITH SECTION 143, OF THE INCOM E-TAX ACT, 1961 - NOTICE - DEEMED TO VALID IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES (CONDITI ONS PRECEDENT) - BLOCK ASSESSMENT PERIOD 1-4-1997 TO 25-7-2012 - ASSESSEE FURNISHED ITS RETURN ON 6-10-2004 - NOTICE UNDER PROVISO TO SECTION 143(2) WAS ISSUED ON 6-7-2006, BEYOND PERIOD OF 12 MONTHS FROM END OF MONTH IN WHI CH RETURN WAS FILED - WHETHER SECTION 292BB, INSERTED BY FINANCE ACT, 200 8, HAS NO M.A. NO 216/ AHD/2018 . A.Y. 2005-06 3 RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT AND IS TO BE CONSTRUED PROSPEC TIVELY - HELD, YES - WHETHER SECTION I 292BB IS ONLY CONFINED TO SERVICE OF NOTICE AND DOES NOT APPLY TO ISSUANCE OF NOTICE, \ NEITHER IT CURES DEF ECT OR ENLARGES STATUTORY PERIOD WHERE A MANDATORY NOTICE UNDER I SECTION 143 (2) IS REQUIRED TO BE ISSUED WITHIN LIMITATION FIXED UNDER ACT - HELD, YE S [PARAS 113 & 14] [IN FAVOUR OF ASSESSEE] 4. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH C OURT DIRECTION, WE DISMISS MISC. APPLICATION FILED ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE. 6. IN THE RESULT, MISC. APPLICATION FILED BY THE RE VENUE IS DISMISSED. . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 10 - 12- 2019 SD/- SD/- (WASEEM AHMED) (MAHAVIR PRASAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TRUE COPY JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD: DATED 10/12/2019 RAJESH COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: - 1. THE APPELLANT. 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT (APPEALS) 4. THE CIT CONCERNED. 5. THE DR., ITAT, AHMEDABAD. 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER DEPUTY/ASSTT.REGISTRAR ITAT,AHME DABAD