Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2015 (10) TMI 169

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ation for the AO to issue notice u/s 148 of the Act dated 27.03.2008 in question at the old address of the assessee. The revenue also fail to establish that on which address out of the two addresses mentioned in the notice u/s 148 was sent and served upon the assessee. The presumption of service comes to the rescue of the revenue only when the notice is dispatched through registered post and the notice is properly addressed. Here is the case where the dispute is to whether the notice u/s 148 dated 27.03.2008 was sent on a proper address or not. It is an established position of law that service of notice u/s 148 of the Act within the prescribed time limit is a condition precedent and mandatory to acquire jurisdiciton by the AO to frame the a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... under section 148 within the time period of limitation and that accordingly the assessment was null and void, especially given the fact that the affidavit filed by the Appellant before the A.O. remained unrebutted. 3. The CIT(A) further erred in not considering the argument that the reopening after a lapse of 5 years from the end of the relevant assessment year was barred by limitation and that there was no allegation in the reasons recorded that the Assessee had failed to disclose material facts. 4. That the CIT(A) while upholding the action under Section 148 failed to appreciate that the reasons recorded for the reopening were of general nature and had no demonstrable nexus with the facts of the Assessee s case. 4. We have hear .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... upon the assessee within the prescribed period. The AO rejected the objection raised by the assessee and framed the assessment u/s 147 r.w.s 143(3) of the Act. The Ld. AR submitted further that similar objection was raised before the Ld. CIT(A) but the assessee could not succeed. 6. The LD. AR submitted that the AO is reported to have issued the notice u/s 148 dated 27.03.2008 by speed post at the assessee s address i.e B-231, Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-I, New Delhi. It is apparent from the said notice u/s 148 that there were two addresses given therein without indicating on which address the notice was issued. The Okhla Industrial Area address referred to by the AO is on the basis of assessee s letter dated 06.11.2002 in the assessme .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nt on the new address and objections raised by the AO regarding non service of notice, affidavit filed by the assessee, letter relating to change of address etc. The Ld. AR also placed reliance on the following decisions:- i) 107 TTJ 149 (Jab.) (TN); ii) 344 ITR 541 (Delhi). 7. Ld. Sr. DR on the other hand tried to justify the orders of the authorities below. She submitted that the assessee has participated in the assessment proceedings only in response of the notice served upon him. She also submitted that the notice u/s 148 issued on 27.03.2008 was well within the prescribed time limit. 8. Considering the above submissions in view of the orders of the authorities below, material available on the record and the decisions relied .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the assessment u/s 147 r.w.s 143(3) of the Act. In absence of service of the said notice issued u/s 148 of the Act upon the assessee, the assessment in question u/s 147 r.w.s 143(3) of the Act is null void. It is ordered accordingly. The issue raised in objection No.-1 to 3 questioning the validity of notice issued u/s 148 dated 27.03.2008 is thus decided in favour of the assessee. The related objection Nos.-1 to 3 are thus allowed. 9. The objection No.-4 of the cross-objection and the grounds raised in the appeal of the revenue questioning the action of the Ld. CIT(A) in deleting the addition made u/s 68 of the Act thus do not need adjudication as the same have become infructuous in view of the above finding on the very validity of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates