9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (11) TMI 1203X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ffixing the digital signature which is system generated process was completed on 12:02 AM on 01.04.2023 HELD THAT:- In the present case the impugned notice was digitally signed on 01.04.2023. Thus, the process of digitally generating the same on the system was completed on 01.04.2023. Plainly, the impugned notice could not have been issued prior to the same being signed. The fact that the steps to generate the impugned notice commenced on 31.03.2023 cannot be a ground to hold that the impugned notice was issued on 31.03.2023. The date of the said notice is correctly reflected as 01.04.2023. In addition, it is also pointed out that the DIN Notice Number mentioned in the impugned notice also indicates that the impugned notice was issued in th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Section 148A(b) of the Act (hereafter the impugned notice) alleging that he had information, which suggests that the petitioner s income for the relevant assessment year (AY 2019-20) had escaped assessment. The annexure to the impugned notice indicated that the quantum of income that has escaped assessment was ascertained at ₹4,86,300/-. The tabular statement as set out in the said annexure, is reproduced below: Sl. No. Particulars Information 1 PAN AAMCA4253A 2 Name ACROPOLIS REALTY PRIVATE LIMITED 3 Assessment Year (s) Involved 2019-20 4 Income Tax Authority from whom the information received. Insight Portal as flagged by High Risk CRIU/VRU Information. 5 Gist of the information received/ gathered As per information, the assessee h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t in cases that fall within the scope of Section 149(1)(b) of the Act. It is clear from the annexure to the said impugned notice that the assessee s income, which has possibly escaped assessment, is below the threshold limit of ₹50,00,000/-. Therefore, the time limit as provided in Clause (b) of Section 149(1) of the Act is not applicable. It is thus the petitioner s case that the impugned notice was issued beyond the period prescribed under the Act and therefore the same is liable to be set aside. 5. It is the Revenue s contention that although the impugned notice bears the date of 01.04.2023, however, the same should be construed as having been issued on 31.03.2023. This contention is premised on the basis that the process for issui ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... formed by the ITBA e-mail software system. Thus, mere generation of Notice on the ITBA Screen cannot in fact or in law constitute issue of notice, whether the notice is issued in paper form or electronic form. In case of paper form, the notice must be despatched by post on or before 31st March 2021 and for communication in electronic form the e-mail should have been despatched on or before 31st March 2021. In the present writ petitions, the despatch by post and e- mail was carried out on or after 01st April 2021 and therefore, we hold that, the impugned Notices were not issued on 31st March 2021. 7. In the present case the impugned notice was digitally signed on 01.04.2023. Thus, the process of digitally generating the same on the system wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
