9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (10) TMI 765X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rovided under sec. 147 to 153 of the Act in framing the assessment u/s 147 of the Act, have not been complied with. 3. In the course of hearing of this appeal, the first point raised by the learned counsel for the assessee that the present Assessing Officer has made the assessment under sec. 147 of the Act without serving any notice required u/s 148 of the Act, by him. 4. In this case, the assessee filed voluntarily his return of income on 15.06.2004 declaring total income at ₹ 2,93,935/-, which was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act at the same amount. The assessee is a Chartered Accountant. Thereafter, a notice u/s 148 dated 13.03.2007 was issued to the assessee on the basis of reasons recorded by the AO that income of ₹ 4,01,000/- has escaped assessment in the light of the information that the assessee had taken bogus accommodation entries of the aforesaid amount. These reasons were recorded by the Income-tax Officer, Ward-19(2), New Delhi, who had issued the notice u/s 148 of the Act on 13.03.2007. This notice u/s 148 of the Act dated 13.03.2007 was issued and sent to the assessee at the following address:- Mr. Kamal Piyush, 10, Community Centre No. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessed to tax with the ITO, Ward 37(1), New Delhi, the ITO, Ward 37(1), New Delhi was required to take necessary action in all these cases at his end. Along with this letter three covers containing the assessment record were sent by the ITO, Ward 19(2), New Delhi to the ITO, Ward 37(1), New Delhi. Thereafter, the ITO, Ward 37(1), 4th Floor, NBlock, Vikas Bhawan, New Delhi issued a notice u/s 143(2) on 27.11.2007 fixing the date of hearing on 7.12.2007. One more notice u/s 143(2) dated 11.12.2007 fixing the matter on 18.12.2007 was also issued by the ITO, Ward 37(1), 4th floor, N-Block, Vikas Bhawan, New Delhi. Further, the same AO vide letter dated 11.12.2007 had given an assessee a final opportunity fixing the matter on 18.12.2007, in failure of which, he proposed to complete the assessment under sec. 144 of the Act, on the basis of the documents available on record and without any further reference to the assessee. Thereafter, the present AO, namely the ITO, Ward 37(1), New Delhi, completed the assessment under sec. 144 of the Act on 31.12.2007, by determining the assessee s total income at ₹ 11,65,400/-. 6. Being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... On 27.11.2007 Sh. Navin Malik attended furnished a copy of return filed earlier alongwith its annexures . The letter referred to above is dated 27.11.07 and was obviously filed on 27.11.07 before the A.O. 13. In his paper book, the appellant has enclosed a copy of the notice u/s 148 dated 13.03.07 where the address is that of Ashok Vihar, Delhi. The appellant has argued that he is residing in Jangpura Extn., Delhi, and the notices were not received by him. It is apparent that the address of Ashok Vihar, Delhi given in the notice u/s 148 was the notice available on record. The appellant has argued that in his return he has given the address of Jangpura Extn., Delhi and prior to that the address is of Pritampura, Delhi. This argument is not acceptable because in the letter dated 27.11.07 discussed above, the appellant has specifically admitted to having received the notice u/s 148. 14. In his letter dated 27.11.07, a copy of which has been filed by the appellant in his paperbook, the appellant has admitted to having received the notice u/s 148. In the asstt. Order, the A.O. has stated that Shri Navin Malik A.R. has attended on certain dates and furnished a copy of ret ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the basis of assuming jurisdiction by issuing notice under sec. 148 of the Act by the ITO, Ward 19(2), New Delhi. Now, the question arises as to whether the notice issued by the ITO, Ward 19(2), New Delhi u/s 148 on 13.03.2007 is a valid notice so that on the basis of which the transferee AO having jurisdiction over the assessee is empowered to complete the assessment u/s 147 of the Act. In the light of the fact that the ITO, Ward 19(2), New Delhi has accepted that the jurisdiction over the assessee s case was lying with the ITO, Ward 37(1), New Delhi and he accordingly transferred the assessment record from his ward to the ITO, Ward 37(1), New Delhi, it is admitted by the ITO, Ward 19(2), New Delhi that he had no jurisdiction over the assessee s case. The ITO, Ward 19(2), New Delhi, issued notice u/s 148 to the assessee at 10, Community Centre No.2, Ashok Vihar, Phase-II, Delhi, but later on, he issued notice u/s 142(1) and notice u/s 274 read with sec. 271(1)(b) of the Act on 7.11.2007 and 22.11.2007 at the assessee s correct address at 10, Birbal Road, Jangpura Extension, New Delhi-14. In the light of this admitted position or facts, it can therefore, be safely held that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t was, therefore, held that the impugned notice u/s 148 of the Act issued by the ITO, Ward 2(2), Ghaziabad was without jurisdiction. The assessment framed on the basis of said notice was held to be bad in law. 13. In the case of Smt. Chetna Kukreja (surpa), the assessee was regularly assessed with ACIT, Circle 23(1), New Delhi. The ITO, Ward-I, Faridabad on receipt of certain information, reopened the assessment u/s 147 of the Act. Subsequently, the records of the assessee were transferred to the ACIT, Circle 23(1), New Delhi, who vested with the jurisdiction of the assessee and eventually, the proceedings culminated into the order under sec. 143(3)/147 of the Act on 27.12.2008. The ACIT, Circle 23(1), New Delhi did not issue fresh notice under sec. 148 to proceed to complete the assessment on the basis of notice issued by the AO, Faridabad. It was, therefore, held that the order passed by the ACIT, Circle 23(1), New Delhi was bad in law. In this case, the Tribunal relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Ranjeet Singh (supra). 14. In the case of Karan Sawhney (supra), a notice under sec. 148 of the Act was issued by the ITO, Ward 20(3). The reassessment order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
