9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (6) TMI 1389X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... quashed. We, therefore, respectfully following the ratio laid down in the case of PCIT Vs. Shree Shoppers Ltd.[ 2023 (3) TMI 1432 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] allow the additional grounds raised by the assessee and quash the assessment proceedings completed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Act. Decided in favour of assessee. - SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For the Appellant by : Shri Rajiv Kumar Choudhary, Advocate For the Respondent by : Shri P. P. Barman, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR ORDER PER GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of Ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Deli vide Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022-23/1046206309(1) dated 07.10.2022 p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d ignored the actual facts relating the transaction entered by the assessee for the reason as per reason recorded suspicion was raised related to LTCG/STCL/Business Loss. 6. That, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) was wrong in ignoring the fact that the Ld. AO erred in making addition of Rs. 4,52,242/- u/s 68 of the Act the towards the entire sale proceedings of the alleged scrip despite of the reason that the transactions entered into were out of the purview of the reason recorded for reopening the case and hence, the addition is liable to be deleted. 7. That, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) was wrong in ignoring the fact that the Ld. AO erred in making addition of Rs. 15,76 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ated 31.01.2011. According to the assessee, jurisdictional issue goes to the root of the matter and, therefore, it can be raised at any stage as held by Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of National Thermal Power Corporation Ltd. 229 ITR 383. On confrontation of these submissions to the Ld. Sr. DR, no objections were raised. Accordingly, we take up the additional grounds for adjudication before considering the grounds taken by the assessee in Form 36. 5. Brief facts of the case are that a notice u/s. 148 dated 30.03.2019 was issued on the assessee. Assessee filed its return in response to notice u/s. 148 on 30.04.2019 reporting a total income of Rs. 1,38,370/-. Subsequently, notice u/s. 143(2) and 142(1) along with questionnaire were issued ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3(2) is no longer res integra. It is a settled position of law that for carrying out an assessment proceedings u/s. 143(3) of the Act, statutory requirement of serving a valid notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act is a must and in absence of which the subsequent proceedings become invalid. In the present case before us, it is a fact that assessee has reported total income of Rs. 1,38,370/- which is below the threshold of Rs. 20 lakhs prescribed in the CBDT Instruction no. 1/2011 read with revised monetary limit for issuing notice by ITO/DCs/ACs. Through this instruction, it stated that in case of metro cities, in case of non-corporate assessees, declared income up to Rs. 20 lakh, the jurisdiction of such corporate assessee will lie with the Income ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on was with the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax. The following factual finding has been recorded by the Tribunal : Therefore, the legal ground stands to be admitted and the same relates to invalid notice issued u/s. 143(2) of the Act. It is a settled position of law that for carrying out the assessment proceedings u/s. 143(3) of the Act, the statutory requirement of serving of valid notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act is must and in absence thereof the subsequent proceedings become invalid. In the case of assessee, the facts are that the assessee has declared income of Rs. 48,47,180/- in the e-return filed on 26.09.2012. For selecting the case for scrutiny notice u/s. 143 (2) of the Act was issued by ITO, Ward-9(4), Kolkata dated 23.09.2013. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... jurisdictional High Court and from the examination of facts of the present case, we find that the aforesaid judgment of the Hon ble High Court is squarely applicable on the facts of the present case. We thus, unhesitatingly hold that ACIT, Circle-31, Kolkata had no valid jurisdiction over the assessee on the date of issuing notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act. Revenue has not controverted this fact by placing any other contrary material on record to indicate otherwise. Since a valid notice u/s. 143(2) has not been issued, the assessment proceedings carried thereafter deserves to be quashed. We, therefore, respectfully following the ratio laid down by Hon ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Shree Shoppers Ltd. (supra), allow the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
