9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (10) TMI 253X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ound that there are proper issuance and service of notices under Section 143(2) of the Act and consequently, the substantial questions of law though cannot be canvassed for the first time before this Court, as the assessee was never prejudiced earlier, yet on facts, we found that there is statutory compliance of the procedure under Section 143 of the Act. Contention regarding the applicability of Section 153 of the Act, we find that at the relevant time, the limitation was one year and the order could have been passed on or before 31.03.2013. Therefore, on this aspect also, the assessee's contention has to be rejected. - Decided against assessee. - Tax Case Appeal Nos.404 & 405 of 2019 - - - Dated:- 24-9-2020 - HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM AND HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE V. BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN For Appellant (In both TCAs): Mr. M.A. Mudi Mannan For Respondent (In both TCAs): Mr. Karthik Ranganathan, Senior Standing Counsel Mr. S.Rajesh, Standing Counsel COMMON JUDGMENT (Delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam, J.) These appeals have been filed by the appellant/assessee under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Assessing Officer issued notices under Section 148 of the Act proposing to reopen the assessments, which are objected to by the assessee and ultimately, by orders dated 30.03.2013, the re-assessment orders were passed. Aggrieved by the same, the assessee preferred appeals before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-8, Chennai (for brevity the CIT(A) ). The appeals were dismissed by order dated 31.03.2015. Challenging the same, the assessee preferred appeals before the Tribunal, which were dismissed by the impugned order. This is how the assessee is before us by way of these tax case appeals raising the aforementioned substantial questions of law. 4. We have elaborately heard Mr. M.A. Mudi Mannan, learned counsel for the appellant/assessee and Mr.Karthik Ranganathan, learned Senior Standing Counsel and Mr. S. Rajesh, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent/Revenue. 5. Before we proceed to consider the merits of the matter and the questions raised before us, we need to point out that the questions, which have been raised before us in these appeals more particularly, substantial questions of law (a) and (b) have been raised before this Court for the first tim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 249 (Del.)]; Sapthagiri Finance Investments vs. Income Tax Officer [T.C(A).No.159 of 2006: dated 17.07.2012]; N.Ahamed Ali vs. Income Tax Officer [T.C(A) No.766 of 2014: dated 19.11.2014] and Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Shri Jai Shiv Shankar Traders Pvt. Ltd. [2015 SCC Online Del 12949]. 8. Per contra, Mr.Karthik Ranganathan, learned Senior Standing Counsel and Mr.S.Rajesh, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Revenue would contend that the assessee should not be permitted to canvass the alleged defective procedure for the first time before this Court, having not raised such contention at any earlier point of time. Further, it is submitted that the case on hand is not one where no notice was issued under Section 143(2) of the Act, but the assessee seeks to argue that the notices were prior to the letters of the Chartered Accountant of the assessee dated 15.02.2013 and no notice was issued after the Chartered Accountant's letters dated 15.02.2013 under Section 143(2) of the Act and therefore, the re-assessments are bad. It is further submitted that the assessee has not placed the correct details, the Revenue has followed the proper procedure and that is why t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ces under Section 148 of the Act. The assessee seeks to make out a case from the averments contained in paragraph 4 to say that the notices under Section 143(2) are dated 12.02.2013, the Chartered Accountant of the assessee filed letters on 15.02.2013 and requested to treat the returns already filed as returns in response to notices under Section 148 and before taking up the re-assessment proceedings, notice under Section 143(2) of the Act has to be issued. 12. After we have carefully gone through the factual position, we find that the argument of the assessee is wholly unsustainable, factually incorrect. Even going by the averment in paragraph 4 of the re-assessment orders, it is not clear as to when the notices under Section 143(2) of the dated 12.02.2013 were served on the assessee. The averments does not clearly state as to on what date, the Authorised Representative appeared before the Assessing Officer, though the Chartered Accountant's letters are dated 15.02.2013. Therefore, the attempt of the assessee appears to be to read in between lines with a view to make out a case of non service of notice at the fag end of the proceedings and for the first time before this Cou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
