9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (12) TMI 210 - AT - Income TaxValidity of assessment - Period of limitation for issuance of notice u/s 143(2) - HELD THAT - It is beyond doubt that the issuance of notice u/s 143(2) was not within time prescribed under the statute. On this aspect, we have further relied upon the judgment in case of Alpine Electronics Asia Pvt. Ltd 2012 (1) TMI 100 - DELHI HIGH COURT Ld. AR wherein it has been held that the service of notice u/s 143(2) within the statutory time limit is mandatory one and not a procedural requirement. Since, there is admittedly a violation of mandatory provision, the assessment order passed was found to be illegal and liable to be set aside. In that view of the matter, respectfully relying upon the same, we find that the issuance of notice and the service of the same is beyond time as prescribed under the statutory provision and the proceeding, therefore, itself became void-ab-initio and hence quashed. Appeal of the assessee is allowed.
Issues:
1. Maintainability of assessment proceeding due to delayed notice under Section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Analysis: The appeal and Cross Objection were filed against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) arising from an order under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act for Assessment Year 2014-15. The Cross Objection raised the issue of maintainability based on the delay in serving the notice under Section 143(2) of the Act. The assessee contended that the notice was issued after the statutory time limit, which was not disputed by the authorities. The Ld. AR argued that the proof of service was not provided despite repeated requests. The Ld. AR referred to the judgment in the case of Alpine Electronics Asia Pvt. Ltd. to support the contention that timely service of notice under Section 143(2) is mandatory, not procedural. The Ld. AR prayed for quashing the order based on the delay in notice issuance. The Tribunal considered the arguments and the judgments cited. It was established that the notice under Section 143(2) was indeed issued beyond the statutory time limit, as per the findings in the Alpine Electronics Asia Pvt. Ltd. case. The Tribunal concurred with the view that timely notice under Section 143(2) is mandatory and not merely procedural. Consequently, the Tribunal found the assessment order to be illegal due to the violation of the mandatory provision. Therefore, the Tribunal quashed the proceeding as void-ab-initio based on the delayed notice issuance. The Cross Objection filed by the assessee was allowed as a result of the above analysis. As a consequence of allowing the Cross Objection, the appeal by the Revenue was deemed infructuous and dismissed. The final decision was in favor of the assessee, with the Cross Objection being allowed, and the Revenue's appeal being dismissed as infructuous. The order was pronounced on 29/09/2022.
|
