9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (4) TMI 172X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sed of six appeals - three appeals filed by the Assessee and three appeals filed by the Revenue - assailing a common order dated 29th January, 2010 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax [CIT(A)] which in turn disposed of the Assessees. appeals against separate assessment orders passed by the Assessing Officer ('AO') under Section 144/148 of the Act. 3. The Revenue has limited its challenge to the ITAT.s finding that the assessment orders in question are as having been passed without issuing any notice under Section 143(2) of the Act. It is contended on behalf of the Revenue that in the facts of the case are that no such notice was necessary before passing assessment orders under Section 144 of the Act. The above conclusion is di ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Assessee objected to the reopening of the assessments, however, the its objections were rejected by the AO. 4.4 It is relevant to note that the notices issued under Section 148 of the Act called upon the Assessee to file its returns for the respective AYs within a period of 30 days from the date of the notices. Concededly, the Assessee failed to file the same within the specific period. 4.5 Thereafter, the AO issued notices (all dated 12th September, 2007) under Section 142(1) of the Act, which were followed by similar notices on 15th November, 2007 and 30th November, 2007. All the aforesaid notices were in standard form and apart from calling upon the Assessee to file correct return of income also called upon the Assessee to furnish d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on of this Court in Ashok Chaddha v. ITO: (2011) 337 ITR 399 (Delhi) in support of its contention that no notice under Section 143(2) was required to be issued. 5. Mr Gautam Jain, learned counsel appearing for the Assessee countered the submissions made by Mr Shivpuri and urged that the returns filed by the Assessee could not be ignored as being invalid. He submitted that a delay in filing a return pursuant to a notice under Section 148 of the Act did not render the return invalid and the only consequences visited upon the assessee would be levy of interest under Section 234A of the Act. 6. Mr Gautam Jain further referred to the order sheet and pointed out that on 10th December, 2007, the Assessee.s representative had informed the AO that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s (See: Pr. CIT v. Silver Line and Anr.: 283 CTR 148 (Del), ACIT v. Hotel Blue Moon: 321 ITR 362 (SC) and CIT v. Pawan Gupta: 318 ITR 322 (Del)) that whenever the return filed by an Assessee is not accepted at its face, it is mandatory for the AO has to issue a notice under Section 143(2) of the Act for proceeding further. It is thus not open for the AO to not issue a notice under Section 143(2) of the Act and proceed directly under Section 144 of the Act by rejecting the return filed by the Assessee. 10. The decision of this Court in Ashok Chaddha (supra) was rendered in the context of Section 153A of the Act and in our view, the same is not applicable in the present case. This Court in several cases pertaining to proceedings under Sectio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
