9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (5) TMI 7X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1172/Bang/2015 for Assessment Year 2007-08. 2. Originally these appeals were disposed off by the Tribunal vide order dated 27.05.2016. The Department as well as the assessee filed before the High Court. The Department raised the issue of confirming deletion of addition made by CIT(A). The assessee went in appeal before the Hon'ble High Court for not deciding the issue relating to the issue of notice under section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called 'the Act'), within time limit. The Hon'ble High Court on hearing the appeal of the assessee in ITA No.455/16 vide judgment dated 27.01.2021 remitted the issue to the Tribunal to adjudicate the issue whether the notice issued under section 143(2) of the Act to the assessee bar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted 28.02.2013 issued to all these assessees is barred by time as it was not issued within the stipulated time as provided in the provision to section 143(2) of the Act. Further, he submitted that the assessee has filed the letter dated 21.12.2011 before the authorities on 23.12.2011 wherein it was stated the return filed originally under section 139(1) of the Act and subsequently filed on 27.03.2009 be treated as a return in response to the notice issued under section 148 of the Act. Thus, according to him the date on which the letter was filed before the authorities to be considered as the date of return filed in response to notice under section 148 of the Act in all these cases. Since the notice under section 143(2) of the Act was issued ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e expiry of twelve months from the end of the month in which the return is furnished." 5. As such, the tewelve months starts from 31.12.2011 and lapses on 31.12.2012. In the present case, as seen from the copy of notice issued under section 143(2) of the Act produced by AR, it was issued on 28.02.2013. Learned DR has not produced any assessment records to prove that whether any notice under section 143(2) of the Act was issued to these assessees before 31.12.2012. His only objection is that provision to sub-section 292BB is coming for the assistance of the Revenue. However, we find that as decided by Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Nittur Vasanth Kumar Mahesh Vs. ACIT reported in 265 taxmann.com 277, it was held that : "As r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... [P] Ltd., Vs. PCIT 108 taxmann.com 48, PCIT Vs. Silver Line 65 taxmann.com 137 that delay in issuing a notice under section 143(2) of the Act would be fatal and assessment is bad in law. 6.1 In the case of CIT Vs. Laxmandas Khandelwal 417 ITR 325 wherein it was held that according to section 292BB of the Act, if the assessee had participated in the proceedings, by way of legal fiction, notice would be deemed to be valid even there be infraction as detailed in the said section. The scope of the provision is to make service of notice having certain infirmities to be proper and valid if there was requisite participation on part of the assessee. It is, however, to be noted that the section does not save complete absence of notice. For section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
