9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (2) TMI 314X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uarely covered by the addition of the Hon ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Jai Shiv Shankar Traders Private Limited [ 2015 (10) TMI 1765 - DELHI HIGH COURT] . Further the Ld. CIT(A) placed reliance on the decision of the in the case of Tilak Raj Satija [ 2013 (8) TMI 924 - ITAT DELHI] which, while placing reliance on the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of Alpine Electronics Asia Private Limited vs. DCIT [ 2012 (1) TMI 100 - DELHI HIGH COURT] laid down that in view of the legal fiction created by section 148 of the Act that a return filed under that section is to be treated as one under section 139, proviso to section 143(2) of the Act also applies to a return filed in response to notice under section 148 of the A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0/3/2012 but the same was not served on the assessee. The assessee submitted before the Assessing Officer that the return filed by them for the assessment year 2005-06 may be treated as return filed in response to notice under section 148 of the Act. By order dated 8/3/2012, income of the assessee was assessed at a loss of ₹ 355,00,43,720/-under section 143(3) of the Act read with section 147 of the Act by making certain additions. 3. Assessee preferred appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) on several grounds challenging the additions. Assessee also preferred an additional ground to the effect that since the assessee has not been served by a notice under section 143(2) of the Act, an incurable defect, and vitiates the assessment proceeding ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .08.2013, Ld. CIT(A) reached a conclusion that for want of notice under section 143(2) of the Act the assessment is rendered null and void. 6. Aggrieved by such findings returned by the Ld. CIT(A), Revenue preferred this appeal. Assessee preferred the cross objections challenging the reassessment under section 147 of the Act and stated that it is only a change of opinion. 7. Ld. DR placed reliance on the assessment order. Ld. AR placed reliance on the decisions of the Hon ble Delhi High Court in the cases of PCIT vs. Sh. Jai Shiv Shankar Traders Private Limited (2016) 383 ITR 448 (Delhi) and PCIT vs. Silver Line (2016) 383 ITR 455 (Delhi) for the principle that subsequent to the statement of the assessee in response to notice u/s. 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the case of Alpine Electronics Asia Private Limited vs. DCIT 341 ITR 247, laid down that in view of the legal fiction created by section 148 of the Act that a return filed under that section is to be treated as one under section 139, proviso to section 143(2) of the Act also applies to a return filed in response to notice under section 148 of the Act and no assessment can be made, if the notice under section 143(2) of the Act is not served within the time as prescribed by the proviso to section 143(2) of the Act. 10. In view of this settled position of law, we do not find anything illegal or irregular in the findings returned by the Ld. CIT(A) in the impugned order. We therefore, while upholding the impugned order, find the grounds of a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
