9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (3) TMI 1403 - AT - Income TaxValidity of assessment - Limitation of passing the assessment order u/s. 144 r.w.s. 147 - HELD THAT - In any event, there is nothing brought in record by the assessee to establish that the assessment order has been made after 31.12.2019 thereby making a time bar. We, therefore reject the first legal plea raised by assessee in Ground No.2 Non generation of DIN number in the body of the assessment order passed u/s. 144 r.w.s. 147 - As no communication shall be issued by the revenue authorities without allotting a DIN number that is necessary to be quoted in any correspondence issued by the revenue authorities. Except under exceptional circumstances as referred by the circular in para 3 , the procedure has to be strictly followed. As per para 3 in, the event the DIN number is not mentioned in any of the communication issued by the assessing authorities, should be with the written approval of Chief Commissioner/Director General of Income Tax and such details must be mentioned in the manual communication by the assessing authorities to the assessee. Para 4 of the circular clearly states that, any communication issued manually which is not in conformity with para 2 and para 3 of the circular shall be treated as invalid and shall be deemed to have never been issued. The above view has been taken by the decisions that has relied by the ld.AR referred to hereinabove and also the decision of M/s. Brandix Mauritius Holdings Ltd. 2022 (11) TMI 34 - ITAT DELHI This Tribunal in the above referred decisions, we hold that, the order passed by the Ld.AO u/s. 144 r.w.s. 147 is invalid and shall be deemed to have never been issued as per para 4 of the CBDT circular, since it is not in conformity with the requirements mentioned in para 3 . Jurisdiction of AO to issue notice - Transfer of case u/s 127 - In the present case, admittedly no notice u/s.143(2) was issued by the AO who had jurisdiction over the assessee at all material point of time. The assessee filed return of income on, with the 28/12/2019. A notice u/s.143(2) of the Act, dated 28/09/2018 was issued by ITO Ward 4(3)(4), who never had jurisdiction over the assessee. Thereafter, notice u/s.142(1) dated 05/11/2019 was issued by ITO Ward-1(1), International Taxation, and assessment order dated 28/12/2019 was passed u/s.144 r.w.s.147 of the Act by the ITO Ward-1(1), International Taxation, who had jurisdiction over the assessee. In such circumstances, the decision of Hotel Blue Moon 2010 (2) TMI 1 - SUPREME COURT and Laxman Das Khandelwal 2019 (8) TMI 660 - SUPREME COURT will be clearly applicable to the facts of the present case. We also find that in a recent decision in case of CIT vs. S.K. Industries 2022 (7) TMI 1345 - SC ORDER has taken identical view that where an Assessing Officer, passed an assessment order under section 143(3) without issuing notice under section 143(2) and only in pursuance with notice issued by another assessing officer under section 143(2), who had no jurisdiction over assessee at relevant time, such assessment order was liable to be set aside. Assessee appeal allowed.
Issues Involved:
1. Limitation of passing the assessment order under Section 144 read with Section 147 of the Income Tax Act. 2. Validity of the assessment order without a Document Identification Number (DIN). 3. Jurisdiction and issuance of notice under Section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act. Summary: Issue 1: Limitation of Passing the Assessment Order The assessee argued that the assessment order served via email on 06.01.2020 was beyond the limitation period prescribed under Section 153 of the Income Tax Act, despite the assessment order being dated 30.12.2019. The Tribunal found no evidence to support the claim that the order was made after 31.12.2019 and rejected this ground of appeal. Issue 2: Validity of Assessment Order Without DIN The assessee contended that the assessment order dated 30.12.2019 was invalid as it did not contain a DIN, violating CBDT Circular No. 19 of 2019. The Tribunal examined the circular, which mandates that all communications by income-tax authorities must include a DIN unless exceptional circumstances are documented. The Tribunal found that the assessment order did not comply with these requirements and thus deemed it invalid and considered it as never issued. Consequently, the additions made in the assessment order were also invalidated, and the appeal for AY 2014-15 was allowed. Issue 3: Jurisdiction and Issuance of Notice Under Section 143(2) For AY 2017-18, the assessee argued that the assessment order was void as the jurisdictional Assessing Officer (AO) did not issue a notice under Section 143(2). The Tribunal noted that notices under Section 143(2) were issued by non-jurisdictional AOs before the case was transferred to the jurisdictional AO, who did not issue a fresh notice. Citing precedents, the Tribunal held that the absence of a valid notice under Section 143(2) by the jurisdictional AO rendered the assessment proceedings void ab initio. The Tribunal quashed the assessment order for AY 2017-18, rendering other grounds of appeal moot. Conclusion: Both appeals for AY 2014-15 and AY 2017-18 were allowed, with the Tribunal quashing the respective assessment orders due to procedural and jurisdictional defects. The orders pronounced on 17th March 2023 concluded that the assessment proceedings were invalid, and the additions made were deleted.
|
