2021 (11) TMI 854 - AT - Income Tax

Validity of assessment - Addition towards family cash found in search - AR submitted that notice u/s 143(2) was not served to the assessee within the specified time - HELD THAT - Revenue can avail Section 292BB only if notice u/s 143(2) was issued and not when admitted position is that no notice was issued as in the instant case. As the notice u/s 143(2) should have been issued till the date 30/9/2014 but the same was issued after the statutory limit. This fact was not denied by the Ld. DR after going through the assessment records. Hence, the additional ground raised by the assessee are allowed. Thus, the assessment order itself becomes null and void ab initio as the notice issued was not issued within the specified time. Since, the assessment itself becomes nullity; there is no need to discuss the merits of the case. The appeal of the assessee is allowed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Validity of assessment order due to non-service of notice u/s 143(2) within specified time limit.

Analysis:
The appeal was filed against the order passed by the CIT(A) for the assessment year 2013-14. The grounds of appeal raised various issues related to the addition of cash and jewellery found during a search and seizure action under section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appellant contested the addition of cash and household expenses, arguing that all cash withdrawals were from verified bank accounts. The Assessing Officer had made additions on account of unexplained jewellery and cash after considering the submissions of the assessee.

The key contention in the appeal was regarding the validity of the assessment order due to the non-service of notice u/s 143(2) within the specified time limit. The appellant argued that the notice was served after the statutory limit, relying on legal precedents to support their case. The appellant emphasized that the assessment was completed without a valid notice u/s 143(2), rendering the additions made by the Assessing Officer invalid. The appellant cited relevant case laws to strengthen their argument regarding the importance of issuing a notice u/s 143(2) within the prescribed time limit.

During the hearing, both parties presented their arguments, with the appellant highlighting the procedural irregularity in the issuance of the notice u/s 143(2). The Tribunal acknowledged the legal grounds raised by the appellant and admitted the additional grounds related to the non-service of notice within the specified time limit. Upon finding that the notice was indeed issued after the statutory limit, the Tribunal allowed the additional grounds raised by the assessee. Consequently, the assessment order was deemed null and void ab initio due to the procedural lapse in serving the notice u/s 143(2) within the prescribed time frame.

In conclusion, the Tribunal held that since the assessment order was rendered nullity due to the non-compliance with the statutory requirement of issuing the notice u/s 143(2) within the specified time limit, there was no need to delve into the merits of the case. Therefore, the appeal of the assessee was allowed based on the procedural irregularity, resulting in the assessment order being declared null and void.

This judgment emphasizes the significance of adhering to procedural requirements, such as timely issuance of notices, in conducting assessments under the Income Tax Act to ensure the validity and legality of the assessment process.