RAJEEV KUMAR GUPTA,GHAZIABAD V. ITO,WARD-2(2), GHAZIABAD

ITA 1166/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Rajeev Kumar Gupta against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which upheld the additions made by the Assessing Officer for the assessment year 2010-11. The primary contention in the appeal was the improper service of notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee argued that the notice was sent to an incorrect address, whereas the correct address was available in the PAN database of the Income Tax Department. The Tribunal examined the records and found discrepancies in the service of the notice, leading to the quashing of the assessment order.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 298833 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-02-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJESH TIWARI
• Assessee Lawyers: R.K. MEHRA; CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT
• Keywords: Validity of assessment; Non compliance
• Section: 147; 148; 144; 142(1)

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण िदʟी पीठ “एस एम सी”, िदʟी ŵी िवकास अव̾थी, Ɋाियक सद˟ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC”, DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आअसं.1166/िदʟी/2024 (िन.व. 2010-11) ITA No.1166/DEL/2024 (A.Y.2010-11) Rajeev Kumar Gupta, Flat No. 102, Plot No. 25, Sector 3, Vaishali, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh 201010 PAN: ABZPG-2200-Q ...... अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant बनाम Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2), CGO Complex-II, Kamla Nehru Nagar, Japur Road, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh 201002 ..... ᮧितवादी/Respondent अपीलाथŎ Ȫारा/ Appellant by : Shri R.K. Mehra, Chartered Accountant ŮितवादीȪारा/Respondent by : Shri Rajesh Tiwari, Sr. DR सुनवाई कᳱ ितिथ/ Date of hearing : 09/12/2024 घोषणा कᳱ ितिथ/ Date of pronouncement : : 27/02/2025 आदेश/ORDER PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM: This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as 'the CIT(A)') dated 17.01.2024, for assessment year 2010-11. 2. The assessee in appeal has assailed findings of the CIT(A) on jurisdictional issue, as well as on merits. In ground no. 1 and 2 of appeal the assessee has assailed validity of assessment on the ground that notice u/s. 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961(hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) was never served upon him. The 2 ITA No. 1166/Del/2024 (AY 2010-11) AR of the assessee pointed that notice u/s. 148 of the Act dated 27.03.2017 (at page 9 of paper book) was sent to the assessee on following address: Shri Rajeev Kumar Gupta, Plot No. 8, Sector-3, Vaishali, Ghaziabad Whereas as per PAN database address of the assessee is Plot No. 25, Flat no. 102, Vaishali, Ghaziabad. To substantiate his contention he placed on record profile of the assessee giving PAN details and address from official portal of the Income Tax Department. The AR of the assessee submitted that it is a well settled law that assessment proceedings without service of notice u/s. 148 of the Act are bad in law. The AR further pointed that the assessee in First Appeal had raised a specific ground challenging validity of assessment in the absence of service of notice u/s. 148 of the Act, the CIT(A) without deciding the jurisdictional issue, decided appeal of the assessee on merits upholding the addition. 3. Per contra, Shri Rajesh Tiwari representing the department vehemently defending the assessment order pointed that the notice u/s. 148 of the Act dated 27.03.2017 was duly served upon the assessee. He referred to observations of AO in para 1 of the assessment order. 4. Both sides heard, orders of the authorities below examined. At this stage, the assessee has confined his argument only on the jurisdictional issue raised in ground no. 1 and 2 of appeal i.e. the assessment order passed without service of notice u/s. 148 of the Act is bad in law. 3 ITA No. 1166/Del/2024 (AY 2010-11) 5. Before proceeding further it would be relevant to refer to the provisions of section 148 of the Act as there were applicable to AY 2010-11. The requirement of section 148 of the Act is that before making assessment/reassessment u/s. 147 of the Act, the Assessing Officer shall serve on the assessee a notice requiring him to furnish a return of his income within the time specified. The section mandates service of notice u/s. 148 of the Act, not merely issuance of notice. In the instant case, the AO has issued notice u/s.148 of the Act to the assessee on 27.03.2017 on the address: Plot No. 8, Sector 3, Vaishali, Ghaziabad. The contention of the assessee is that the assessee is neither residing on said address, nor the aforesaid address is in the PAN database of the Department. The assessee has furnished information available in PAN database of the Department. As per profile of the assessee available on portal of Department address of the assessee is Plot No. 25, Flat No. 102, Vaishali, Ghaziabad 201010, Uttar Pradesh, India. A perusal of the assessment order reveals that the same has been passed u/s. 144/147 of the Act. Non appearance of the assessee before the AO is attributed to non service of notices issued u/s. 148 and 142(1) of the Act. The notices issued by the AO on wrong address were never served on the assessee. Assessment made without service of mandatory notice u/s. 148 of the Act is bad in law, hence, liable to be quashed. 6. The assessee had raised a specific ground of appeal before the CIT(A) challenging validity of assessment without service of notice u/s. 148 of the Act. I find that the CIT(A) instead of deciding the jurisdictional ground has scuttled the issue my merely observing that notice u/s. 148 of the Act was received by the assessee and the assessee had also filed return in response to u/s. 148 of the Act. 4 ITA No. 1166/Del/2024 (AY 2010-11) Whereas perusal of assessment order reveal that the assessee did not comply with the notices issued u/s. 148 or notices issued u/s. 142(1) of the Act. The observations of the CIT(A) are contrary to records. In light of the facts on record and non compliance of provisions u/s. 148 of the Act by the AO, I hold that assessment order passed u/s. 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act is bad in law; hence, the same is quashed. 7. In so far as other grounds of appeal on merits, they have become academic as the assessee succeeds on jurisdictional issue. 8. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on Thursday the 27th day February, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (VIKAS AWASTHY) ᭠याियक सद᭭य/JUDICIAL MEMBER िदʟी/Delhi, ᳰदनांक/Dated 27.02.2025 NV/- ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषतCopy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथᱮ/The Appellant , 2. ᮧितवादी/ The Respondent. 3. The PCIT/CIT(A) 4. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध, आय.अपी.अिध., िदʟी /DR, ITAT, िदʟी 5. गाडᭅ फाइल/Guard file. 5 ITA No. 1166/Del/2024 (AY 2010-11) BY ORDER, //True Copy// (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, DELHI "