MCG MANUFACTURING CO PRIVATE LIMITED,ZAKIR NAGAR, SOUTH EAST DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 16(3), DELHI

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short ‘the CIT(A)’] dated 20.01.2025, for Assessment Year 2017-18.

Shri Pranav Yadav, appearing on behalf of the assessee submitted that appeal of the assessee is squarely covered by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme of India in the case of Union of India vs Rajeev Bansal 469 ITR 46 (SC). He further placed reliance on the decision in the case of Communist Party of India (Marxist)

Per contra, Shri Manoj Kumar representing the department vehemently defended the impugned order and assessment proceedings. The ld. DR submitted that the notice u/s.148 of the Act has been issued within the period of limitation under the Act. He prayed for dismissing appeal of the assessee.

Both sides heard, orders of the authorities below examined. A perusal of assessment orders shows that the same has been passed in ex-parte proceedings. The assessee filed appeal against the assessment order dated 12.05.2023 passed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act,1961(hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). The assessee in first appeal inter alia assailed validity of assessment proceedings on the ground of invalid notice issued u/s.148 of the Act. The CIT(A) without adjudicating jurisdictional issues raised by the assessee, restored the case back to Assessing Officer (AO) for making fresh assessment. A perusal of impugned order reveals that ground no. 1 to 6 of appeal before the CIT(A) relate to jurisdictional issue challenging validity of reopening. The CIT(A) evaded the issue and has restored the case to AO. When the assessee has raised a specific jurisdictional issue, the CIT(A) being a quasi jurisdictional authority was duty bound to decide the same before adjudicating the ground on merits of the addition. It is only when the AO assumes valid jurisdiction, the gate to make additions/disallowances is open to the AO. Considering entire facts of the case, I deem it appropriate to restore this appeal to the CIT(A) for deciding jurisdictional grounds i.e. ground no. 1 to 6 of appeal [before the CIT(A)] before taking up the ground on merits of the addition. The CIT(A) shall decide the appeal of assessee (AY 2017-18) denovo after affording reasonable opportunity of making submissions to the assessee, in accordance with law.