9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (5) TMI 163X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e to be quashed. In the case on hand as the Revenue could not prove the service of notice u/s 148 on the assessee in accordance with law the re-assessment made u/s 147 read with section 144 pursuant to such notice is void ab initio and bad in law. Hence, the reassessment order made u/s 144 read with section 147 is quashed. - Decided in favour of assessee. - I.T.A No. 138/Del/2018 - - - Dated:- 27-4-2022 - SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD , JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessee by : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. Shri Somil Agarwal, CA Revenue by : Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR ORDER This appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Noida dated 29.09.2017 for the AY 2009-10. The assessee chal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 148 was issued on 30.03.2016. Similarly notice u/s 142(1) was issued on 04.05.2016 fixing the date of compliance as 23.05.2016 and again on 17.10.2016 fixing the date of compliance as 21.10.2016 alongwith questionnaire. The AO recorded a finding that assessee has failed to make any compliance and, therefore, proceeded to complete the assessment. It is noticed that the assessment was completed u/s 147 read with section 144 of the Act determining the long term capital gain at Rs.22,20,000/-. 6. On appeal the Ld. CIT(A) sustained the same. Before the ld. CIT(A) the assessee contended that notice u/s 148 was not served. However, the Ld. CIT(A) simply rejected the objections raised by the assessee stating that assumption of jurisdiction nu/s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ire discussion in this behalf, in appeal, is summarized by the ITAT in para 8 of its order, relevant portion whereof makes the following reading:- We have carefully considered the matter. We have also perused the record produced by the department. In our humble opinion, the CIT (A) has taken the correct view of the matter in holding that there was no valid service of notice under section 148 and hence the reassessment proceedings are null and void. The first notice issued on 29.1.2004 by speed-post was said to have been served on the old address at East of Kailash. There is no proof of service on record. Even otherwise, this is not valid service because the assessee had already filed its return for the assessment year 2003-04 on 28.11 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n address. Ld. Counsel for the Revenue argued that no doubt in the return filed on 28.11.2003 for the assessment year 2003-04, on the first page new address is given, the assessee had also shown the old address in the annexure to the said return showing computation of assessable income. However, learned counsel for the assessee had explained that the assessee had sold and disposed of the old premises at East of Kailash by a sale deed and even given the possession to the purchaser on 3.9.2003. Affidavit to that effect is filed along with the copy of the sale deed. After hearing the arguments at length and going through various documents, we gather the impression that it may be a case of bona fide mistake on the part of the Assessing Of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
